d8'i  <' 9 


REPORT 


OF    THE 


amertcati  Humane  association 


ON 


VIVISECTION  IN  AMERICA 


ADOPTED 


AT    MINNEAPOLIS,    MINN 


September  26,  1895. 


CHICAGO,  ILL. 
THE  AMERICAi^  HUMANE   ASSOCIATION. 

560  Wabash  Avenue. 

1896. 


k  4  fc  7 


An  abstract  of  the  following  Report  may  be  had  at 
twenty  cents  per  dozen  copies. 

This  Report  will  be  sent  free  to  any  Public  Library 
in  the  United  States;  but  otherwise  than  this,  it  is  not 
intended  for  gratuitous  distribution.  A  limited  number 
of  copies  may  be  had  at  fifteen  cents  each,  postpaid, 
by  addressing 

THE  SPECIAL   COMMITTEE,      - 
Box  215, 

Providence,  R.I. 


DUKE  UNIVERSITY 
MEDICAL  CENTER  LIBRARY 
HISTORICAL  COLLECTIONS 


it 


:^ 


REPORT 


OF   THE 


Smericau  ©timane  Association 


ON 


VIVISECTION    IN    AMERICA 


ADOPTED 


AT    MINNEAPOLIS,    MINN. 

September  26,  1895. 


CHICAGO,  ILL. 

THE   AMERICAN  HUMANE   ASSOCIATION. 

560  Wabash  Avenue. 

1896. 


University  Press  : 
John  AVilsun  and  Son,  Cambridge,  U.  S.  A. 


REPORT 

OF 

THE    AMERICATS^    HUMANE    ASSOCIATION 

ON 

VIVISECTION  IN  AMERICA. 

MIJS^NEAPOLIS,  SEPT.  26,  1895. 


THE  Special  Committee  appointed  at  the  last  annual  meeting  of 
the  Americax  Humane  Association,  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  a  census  of  the  opinions  regarding  Vivisection  which  gen- 
erally prevail,  have  now  completed  their  task,  and  beg  leave  to  submit 
the  following  report:  — 

The  purpose  and  scope  of  their  investigations  seem  to  have  been 
somewhat  misunderstood.  The  American  Humane  Association  did 
not  wish  to  obtain  a  preponderance  of  signatures,  either  for  or  against 
the  practice  of  vivisection.  What  seemed  desirable  was  an  investi- 
gation regarding  the  extent  to  which  different  views,  particularly 
regarding  painful  experimentation,  are  now  entertained  by  those 
more  influential  classes  of  society  whose  judgments  exert  the  greater 
potency  in  the  formation  of  public  opinion.  To  do  this,  it  became 
necessary  to  formulate  precise  statements  of  slightly  diverging 
beliefs,  in  such  form  as  that  they  should  at  any  rate  touch  this  one 
question  of  restriction  or  non-restriction  of  experiments  in  pain.  It 
needs  to  be  remembered  that  the  word  "vivisection,"  when  used  as 
a  synonym  for  scientific  experiments  upon  animals,  may  cover  op- 
erations not  more  painful  th.'m  a  pin-prick;  or,  on  the  other  hand, 
experiences  as  excruciating  as  the  imagination  can  conceive.  To  ask 
simply  whether  one  approves  of  vivisection  or  condemns  it,  would  be 
meaningless,  unless  the  definitions  given  were  precise. 

Three  leading  views  regarding  the  practice  of  vivisection  may  be 
easily  recognized :  — 

1.  Its  total  condemnation  because  of  tendency  to  cruelty. 

2.  Its  restriction  within  certain  limits. 

3.  Its  approval  without  any  other  restraint  than  the  will  of  the 
experimenter  himself. 


4  REPORT   OF   THE   AMERICAN   HUMANE    ASSOCIATION 

The  second  view,  however,  is  capable  of  considerable  subdivision'. 
One  person  may  favor  vivisection  provided  it  be  limited  to  absolutely 
painless  experiments.  Another  would  not  condemn  it  if  the  pain 
were  slight,  and  the  possible  utility  to  humanity  very  great. 

Four  statements  of  opinion  were  carefully  formulated,  and  to  these 
a  fifth  was  finally  added,  which  was  sent,  however,  as  hereafter  noted, 
to  but  very  few  others  than  members  of  the  medical  profession.  But 
even  these  could  by  no  means  express  all  the  shades  of  differing 
opinion  which  seem  to  exist  in  regard  to  this  subject.  Some  few 
persons  indeed  could  find  nothing  in  either  statement  to  endorse  or 
condemn,  while  others,  reading  with  extreme  and  careful  discrimina- 
tion, indicated  by  erasures  and  changes  in  phraseology  their  variance 
of  opinion.  But  that  the  statements,  as  drawn,  do  fairly  represent 
existing  opinions  is  evinced  by  the  fact,  that,  without  any  erasures 
or  changes,  each  one  received  the  signatures  of  men  of  national 
reputation. 

The  choice  of  persons  whose  views  on  this  question  should  be 
solicited  was  a  matter  of  no  little  consideration.  It  was,  of  course, 
impossible  to  ask  all  whose  judgment  would  be  valuable ;  and  such 
selection  was  necessary  as  at  least  should  be  fairly  representative  in 
character  and  weight.  It  may  be  of  interest  to  know  the  leading 
rules  which  governed  the  final  choice  of  names. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  the  opinions  of  the  Medical  Profession  were 
desired.  For  their  benefit,  real  or  supposed,  the  practice  of  vivisec- 
tion is  mostly  carried  on.  If,  then,  all  experiments  upon  living 
animals  are  of  such  great  value  that  no  restraint  whatever  need  be 
observed,  it  might  be  safely  assumed  that  medical  men  after  years 
of  practical  experience  in  the  treatment  of  disease  would  be  certain 
to  know  it.  But  the  number  of  men  in  the  medical  profession  in 
this  country  alone  is  over  one  hundred  thousand,  and  to  ask  the 
judgment  of  all  these  would  be  manifestly  impracticable.  Then, 
too,  the  opinions  of  young  men  fresli  from  the  medical  school  could 
not  compare  in  value  with  those  of  other  physicians  who  for  years 
have  been  engaged  in  the  combat  with  disease.  It  was  necessary 
somewhat  to  draw  lines.  The  medical  profession  in  the  States  of 
New  York  and  Massachusetts  may  be  assumed  to  be  as  intelligently 
acquainted  with  the  whole  subject  as  physicians  anywhere  in  the 
United  States,  and  it  seemed  to  us  exceedingly  probable  that  the 
views  of  physicians  in  other  sections  of  the  country  would  not  greatly 
differ  in  their  proportions  from  the  varying  judgments  regarding 
vivisection  which  should  be  elicited  in  these  two  great  common, 
wealths.  Every  physician  in  these  two  States  who  had  been  at  least 
fifteen  years  in  the  practice  of  his  profession  was  invited  to  give  the 
Association  the  benefit  of  his  mature  experience  on  the  question.     A 


ON   VIVISECTION   IN   AMERICA.  '        •  5 

few  prominent  medical  men  in  other  States  received  like  invitations, 
but  these  instances  were  rare.  The  physicians  upon  the  Board  of 
Instructors  in  several  leading  medical  colleges  in  ISTew  York,  Boston, 
Philadelphia,  Syracuse,  Chicago,  and  other  cities  were  also  asked  for 
expressions  of  opinion.  The  jur^^  in  this  case  seems  tons  to  be  fairly 
representative  of  the  medical  profession,  and  the  results  obtained 
were  so  unexpected  as  to  call  for  special  remark.  If  we  may  judge 
from  the  replies  received,  the  majority  of  physicians  who  have  tested 
value  by  experience  are  not  in  favor  of  "unrestricted  vivisection." 

2.  For  the  opinions  of  those  engaged  in  Educational  work,  our  cir- 
culars were  sent,  first,  to  the  president  of  each  college  and  university 
in  the  United  States;  and,  next,  to  the  principal  members  of  the 
teaching  faculty  of  the  leading  institutions  of  learning. 

3.  In  respect  to  Clergymen,  it  was  very  difficult  to  determine  from 
whom  among  them  opinions  should  be  asked;  and,  as  in  the  case  of 
physicians,  it  was  deemed  best  to  solicit  views  only  among  those  of 
the  various  denominations  whose  years  of  -service  or  whose  promi- 
nent position  in  the  Church  lent  to  their  words  a  greater  weight. 
To  professors  in  various  theological  schools,  to  clergymen  in  our 
larger  cities,  and  especially  to  men  upon  whom  for  years  of  service 
or  unusual  activity  in  clerical  work  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Divinity 
has  been  conferred,  our  circulars  have  been  principally  addressed. 
Your  committee  regret  the  modest  reticence  which  in  so  many  in- 
stances probably  prevented  that  mention  of  honorary  degrees  to 
which  signers  were  entitled,  and  of  which  note,  was  requested.  In 
some  cases,  by  careful  research,  these  have  been  supplied;  but  there 
are  doubtless  many  to  which  such  titles  belong,  and  from  which  they 
are  absent  in  the  lists  which  follow. 

4.  From  Literary  Men,  Editors,  and  Authors,  opinions  were  sought, 
when  addresses  could  be  obtained,  wherever  achievement  and  worthy 
popularity  lent  weight  to  the  expression  of  their  views.  Besides  all 
these  classes,  there  were  a  few  others  in  other  walks  of  life  for 
whose  judgment  the  world  has  regard,  and  whose  opinions  have  been 
sought.  From  foreign  countries  also  some  expression  of  sentiment 
was  desired;  but  these  names  are  reckoned  separately  in  the  lists 
which  follow. 

Your  committee  believe  that  opinions  thus  obtained  are  of  special 
value.  We  have  not  attempted  a  mere  "counting  of  heads."  We 
believe  that  the  views  thus  collected  do  represent,  in  their  propor- 
tions, the  various  shades  of  opinion  which  prevail  among  the  edu- 
cated classes  of  the  country  in  regard  to  the  question  of  unrestricted 
vivisection. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  in  some  instances  the  purpose  of  this 
inquiry  should  have  been  so   misunderstood,  and   that   those   who 


6  REPORT    OF   THE   AMERICAN   HUMANE   ASSOCIATION 

might  have  aided  us  by  some  expression  of  opinion  preferred  rather 
the  expression  of  criticism  or  abuse.  One  of  the  most  prominent 
biologists  of  America  suggested,  with  ghastly  and  peculiar  humor, 
"that  the  American  Humane  Association  do  science  the  good  service 
of  suppressing  anti-vivisectionists,  —  by  persuasion,  if  possible,  but 
hy  vivisection,  if  the  seat  of  disease  is  too  deep  for  more  humane 
relief."  Another  eminent  scieutific  man  belonging  to  Syracuse 
University  went  so  far  as  to  write  an  anonymous  letter  to  your  com- 
mittee, suggesting  that,  before  touching  the  question  of  vivisection, 
the  American  Humane  Association  should  bring  law  to  interfere 
with  such  cruelties  as  "poisoning  roaches  and  bed-bugs,  chasing 
butterflies,  breaking  down  spiders'  webs,  stealing  honey  from 
bees,"  etc.,  — actions  which  he  would  apparently  have  regarded  as 
even  more  reprehensible  than  the  torments  inflicted  by  Magendie, 
Mantegazza,  and  their  imitators,  upon  man's  nearest  companion  and 
friend.  Detection  of  the  writer  was  not  at  all  difficult,  but  further 
publicity  than  this  would  be  too  severe  a  punishment  for  what 
perhaps  was  a  thoughtless  act. 

Numerous  letters  were  received  either  accompanying  signatures  to 
one  of  the  statements  or  in  explanation  of  disagreement  with  their 
phraseology.  Your  committee  exceedingly  regret  that  limitations  of 
space  prevent  anything  but  the  briefest  quotation  from  the  majority 
of  these  communications.  Some  of  these  valued  letters  may  perhaps 
hereafter  be  printed  in  other  form.  For  all  suggestions  and  advice 
the  committee  tender  thanks.  Even  the  few  ungracious  and  critical 
epistles  received  are  not  without  their  value,  if  only  as  indications 
of  proclivities  and  tendencies  of  which  note  must  be  taken. 

What  are  the  results  of  our  investigation's  ?  May  we  assume  that 
in  the  more  educated  classes  of  the  United  States  a  majority  of 
persons  approve  of  the  dissection  of  living  animals  to  any  extent  and 
for  any  purpose  a  physiologist  may  desire  ? 

No.  Of  the  total  number  of  American  opinions  thus  obtained 
there  were :  — 


In  favor  of  unlimited  vivisection 
Against  unlimited  vivisection 
Evasive  or  obscure 

Total     .    .     .     .     . 


Number. 


281 

1,753 

.52 


2,086 


Per  Cent. 


13.4 

84.1 

2.5 


100.0 


But  vivisection  is  a  practice  with  which  physicians  are  principally 
concerned.  How  do  they  stand  ?  Youth  and  enthusiasm  would 
perhaps  demand  liberty  of  action  in    every  way;    it  is  only  when 


ON   VIVISECTION    IN   AMERICA. 


men  have  years  of  practical  experience  that  questions  of  use  or  use- 
lessness  really  arise.  What  is  the  judgment  of  medical  men  whose 
experiences  with  the  problems  of  disease  and  pain  have  taught  them 
where  best  to  look  for  useful  knowledge  ?  May  we  infer  that  as  a 
rule  the  medical  profession  demands  the  privilege  of  vivisection 
without  limitations  or  restrictions  ? 

No.'    So  far  as  given,  their  vote  is  as  follows:'  — 


Total  No. 

Per  Cent. 

• 

243 
968 

28 

19.6 

78.1 

2.3 

Acjaiust  unlimited  vivisection     .          

Total 

1,239 

100.0  ■ 

We  regard  this  result  of  our  inquiries  as  of  unusual  value.  For 
many  years  it  has  been  taken  for  granted  that  on  one  side  of  this 
question  of  free  vivisection  were  the  only  true  guardians  of  scientific 
research,  the  united  ranks  of  physicians  and  surgeons,  urging  the 
value  of  all  experiments  the  physiologist  desires  to  make;  while 
on  the  other  side  were  to  be  found  only  ignorance  and  sentimen- 
tality united  in  opposing  what  they  did  not  comprehend  and  could 
not  value.  We  see  that  this  is  entirely  an  erroneous  conception 
of  facts.  It  is  only  the  minority  of  experienced  physicians  that 
demand  for  physiological  research  unlimited  opportunity  indepen- 
dent of  utility,  and  many  of  these  are  physiologists  rather  than 
general  practitioners.  The  great  majority  of  medical  men  ask, 
indeed,  that  experimentation  shall  not  be  wholly  abolished;  but. they 
ask  also  that  it  shall  not  be  abused.  They  condemn  the  cruel  freedom 
which  exists  on  the  continent  of  Europe,  and,  as  a  rule,  the  repetition 
of  painful  experiments  for  the  teaching  of  well-known  facts. 

We  cannot  refrain  from  quoting  here  the  opinion  of  one  of  the 
most  distinguished  physicians  in  this  country,  —  Dr.  Theophilus 
Parvin,  LL.D.,  late  president  of  the  American  Academy  of  Medicine, 
and  professor  in  Jefferson  Medical  College,  —  as  an  illustration  of 
what  we  believe  to  be  the  position  of  the  majority  of  the  medical 
profession  in  this  country  who  have  reached  middle  age:  — 

"It  is  wise  for  physicians  interested  in  vivisection  to  recognize 
that  there  is  on  the  part  of  prominent  women  and  men  in  the  laity 
a  strong  sentiment  of  antagonism  to  experiment  on  animals;  and 
therefore  they  should  avoid  all  such  work  not  promising  certain 
benefit  to  man,  and  anaesthetics  ought  always  to  be  employed.  I 
sometimes  fear  that  the  anaesthesia  is  frequently  nominal  rather 
than  real,  else  why  so  many  and  ingenious  contrivances  for  con- 
fining the  animal   during   operations, — contrivances   that  are  not 


REPOET    OF    THE   AMERICAN    HUMANE   ASSOCIATION 


made  use  of  in  surgical  operations  upon  human  beings,  their  immo- 
bility being  secured  by  profound  anaesthesia. 

"Shoijld  the  law  restrict  the  performance  of  vivisection?  I  think 
it  ought,  chiefly  as  an  expression  of  public  sentiment,  and  for  moral 
effect.  .  .  .  That  restriction  ought  to  forbid  all  experiments  made 
without  worthy  objects,  and  in  every  case,  so  far  as  possible,  the 
animal  during  and  subsequent  to  the  operation  must  be  preserved 
from  pain.   .   .   , 

"  Vivisection  is  in  more  danger  from  ignorant,  rash,  and  reckless 
experimenters  than  f^om  those  directly  hostile  to  it.  I  cannot  think 
that  vivisections  done  for  teaching  purposes,  simply  showing  what 
has  been  proved  time  and  again  upon  hundreds  and  thousands  of 
victims,  are  justifiable  unless  anaesthesia  is  employed,  to  not  merely 
mitigate,  hut  to  completely  abolish  sujfering  of  the  animals.  Other- 
wise the  influence  of  such  experiments  is  injurious  both  to  the  operator 
and  to  the  tvittiesses  of  the  operatio7i." 

Let  us  analyze  yet  more  closely  the  medical  opinions  received 
from  Massachusetts  and  New  York.  The  replies  received  from 
physicians  in  these  States  may  be  tabulated  as  follows:  — 


For  vivisectiou  without  restriction  .  . 
For  vivisection  when  restricted  by  utility 
For  vivisection  when  without  pain  .  . 
For  the  total  prohibition  of  vivisection  . 
Obscure  or  evasive 

Total     ......... 


Total  No.    Per  Cent 


220 
513 
186 
207 
24 


1,150 


19.1 
44.6 
16.2 
18. 
2.1 


100.0 


We  see  no  reason  to  doubt  that,  with  slight  variations  only,  these 
proportions  represe'nt  the  sentiments  prevailing  in  the  medical  pro- 
fession throughout  the  country.  If  we  ask  the  judgment  of  other 
influential  classes  in  the  community,  we  find  the  same  tendency, 
even  more  pronounced.  In  the  following  tables  we  have  indicated  a 
number  of  opinions  from  clergymen,  educators,  presidents  of  univer- 
sities and  colleges,  and  those  engaged  in  college  work,  etc :  — 


Clergy, 
men. 

Educa- 
tors. 

Authors, 

Editors, 

etc. 

Per  Cent. 

For  vivisection  without  restriction      .     .     . 
For  vivisection  when  restricted  by  utility    . 
For  vivisection  when  without  pain      .     .     . 
For  the  total  prohibition  of  vivisection  .     . 
Obscure  or  evasive 

0 
189 
116 
144 

6 

34 

84 
49 
52 
16 

4 
63 
26 
30 

2 

4.7 
41.2 
23.5 
27.7 

2  9 

100  0 

Total 

455 

235 

125 

ON   VIVISECTION   IN   AMERICA.  9 

To  your  committee,  therefore,  it  seems  certain  that  the  majority  of 
those  who  represent  enliglitened  public  opinion  in  this  country  are 
not  favorable  to  unlimited  vivisection.  They  do  not  indeed  demand 
abolition  of  all  experimental  research  whatever;  nor  are  they  agreed 
as  to  the  scope  of  restrictions,  the  value  of  legal  regulation,  the  defi- 
nition of  "utility,"  or  the  methods  by  which  even  desirable  restraints 
may  be  practically  enforced.  There  is  also  somewhat  of  scepticism 
as  to  the  extent  to  which  vivisection  has  been  at  all  abused,  and 
many  who  would  quickly  condemn  the  evil  are  far  from  being  con- 
vinced that  such  evil  exists.  But  one  fact  stands  clearly  out,  that  a 
majority  of  the  class  to  whom  we  have  appealed  agree  that  loherever 
vivisection  approaches  cruelty  and  icselessness,  it  should  be  pj^'ohibited 
and  condemned  by  law. 

It  is  true,  however,  that  this  investigation  has  made  evident  the 
existence  of  a  minority  contrary  sentiment,  of  which  due  note  must 
be  taken..  There  are  physicians  and  surgeons  whose  self -sacrificing 
devotion  to  humanity  is  beyond  the  possibility  of  doubt,  who  have 
signed  for  unlimited  vivisection  without  criticism  or  restraint. 
There  are  presidents  of  universities  whose  zeal  for  science  has  led 
them  to  declare  that  with  vivisection  "morality  has  nothing  to  do." 
There  are  clergymen  of  high  repute  who  would  condemn  all  cruelty 
in  the  abstract,  but  whose  faith  "in  the  substance  of  things  un- 
seen" would  make  of  the  physiological  laboratory  a  temple  for 
Humanity  where  all  sacrifice  is  painless  and  its  object  the  universal 
good. 

There  are  large  numbers  of  persons  who  suggest  that  all  criticism 
of  scientific  methods  is  premature,  or  out  of  place  in  the  presence  of 
such  other  forms  of  wide-spread  cruelty  as  accompany  butchery  and 
so-called  sport.  There  are  others  who  deprecate  the  infliction  of 
pain  or  disuse  of  anaesthetics,  unless  it  happens  to  be  "necessary  for 
the  success  of  the  experiment,"  — a  qualification  which  at  once  nullifies 
the  very  restriction  implied.  In  many  colleges  and  institutions  of 
learning  we  note  a  prevalent  disposition  to  trust  a  vivisector  entirely, 
"unless  there  seems  reason  for  distrust,"  —  a  contingency  which  is 
not  likely  to  happen,  where  trust  is  absolute  and  faith  serene.  But 
above  everything  else  exists  doubt  or  ignorance  of  Avhat  vivisection 
really  is.  A  method  of  scientific  research  is  shrouded  in  mystery, 
and  is  almost  unknown  and  unknowable  save  to  a  few. 

"What  action  may  be  suggested  to  the  American  Humane  Associa- 
tion as  a  result  of  your  committee's  inquiry? 

The  following  conclusions  seem  to  them  not  only  to  be  justified 
by  evidence,  but  in  accord  with  the  interests  of  both  science  and 
humanity :  — 


10  REPORT   OF   THE   AMERICAN   HUMANE    ASSOCIATION. 

I.  Vivisection  is  not  merely  a  metliod  of  scientific  teaching  or 
investigation,  but  a  practice  which  is  justly  subject  to  ethical 
restraints. 

II.  We  believe  this  practice  has  been  abused.  We  are  compelled 
to  admit  that  President  Parvin  was  right  in  declaring  before  the 
American  Academy  of  Medicine  that  there  are  some  American  vivi- 
sectors  "who  seem,  seeking  useless  knowledge,  to  be  blind  to  writh- 
ing agony  and  deaf  to  the  cry  of  pain,  and  to  have  been  guilty  of 
the  most  damnable  cruelties." 

III.  We  believe  in  the  potency  of  legislation  to  lessen  these 
abuses.  Again  we  agree  with  President  Parvin  that  "law  should 
restrict  the  performance  of  vivisection;  "  that  "vivisections  done  for 
teaching  purposes,  simply  showing  what  has  been  proved  time  and 
again  upon  hundreds  and  thousands  of  victims,  are  not  justifiable  un- 
less anaesthesia  is  employed,  to  not  merely  mitigate,  but  to  completely 
abolish  the  suffering  of  the  animals."  We  are  glad  to  find  ourselvgs 
in  perfect  accord  with  a  scientific  authority  who  declares  that  "the 
influence  of  such  experiments  without  anaesthesia  is  injurious  both 
to  the  operator  and  to  the  witnesses  of  the  operation.'' 

IV.  But  far  transcending  in  importance  the  enactments  of  any 
restrictive  legislation  is  the  wide  dissemination  of  absolute,  accurate 
knowledge  of  vivisection  as  it  is  to-day  carried  on  in  the  seclusion  of 
American  laboratories.  It  is  alleged  that  the  infliction  of  pain  is  of 
rare  occurrence;  that  abuses  are  unknown,  and  that  nothing  whatever 
is  done  which  in  any  way  needs  to  be  concealed  from  the  public  eye. 
But  these  statements  are  controverted.  How  then  shall  truth  be 
reached  and  be  made  evident  ?  It  seems  to  us  that  knowledge,  if 
attainable,  must  rest  here,  as  Science  declares  it  must  rest  elsewhere, 
not  on  the  statements  of  interested  parties,  but  on  that  firm  basis 
she  herself  demands,  —  the  accurate  observation  of  facts  by  impartial 
witnesses.  Yet,  how  is  such  evidence  possible  so  long  as  the  doors 
of  laboratories  are  locked  and  barred  to  the  public,  and  even  to 
physicians  and  surgeons  who  are  not  personally  known  ?  In  the 
interests  of  scientific  truth  we  suggest  therefore  that  an  experiment 
be  made.  We  recommend  that  the  American  Humane  Association 
during  the  coming  year  ask  of  each  physiological  laboratory  in  this 
country,  whether  it  will  accord  permission  to  the  President  of  the 
local  Humane  Society  or  to  his  authorized  representative  to  be 
present  during  any  experiments  upon  animals  that  may  take  place, 
simply  as  a  silent  observer,  and  entirely  without  privilege  of  sug- 
gestion, criticism,  or  unsolicited  remark.     If  there  be  no  occasion 


ON   VIVISECTION   IN   AMEEICA.  11 

for. mystery  or  seclusion,  we  believe  this  privilege  will  be  accorded, 
if  only  in  the  interests  of  truth  and  for  the  dissipation  of  error. 
If  refused,  there  can  be  but  one  inference  and  but  one  remaining 
appeal. 

Respectfully  submitted. 

(Signed)         Titus  Munson  Coan,  M.  D. 
Albert  Leffingwell,  M.  D. 
Matthew  Woods,  M.  D. 


In  accordance  with  the  above  recommendation  the  American 
Humane  Association  adopted  the  following  resolution :  — 

''  Resolved,  That  the  American  Humane  Association,  having  con- 
sidered the  report  of  its  Special  Committee  on  Vivisection,  believes 
that  it  should  ask  for  yet  more  light  regarding  the  aims  and  methods 
of  experimentation  upon  living  animals.  Laying  aside  for  the  present 
all  other  evidence,  the  Association  seeks  now  for  positive  knowledge  ' 
by  that  method  which  Science  idealizes  and  demands, — based,  not 
upon  authority,  but  upon  the  accumulated  experience  of  a  large  num- 
ber of  independent  observers  in  all  parts  of  the  country. 

"  The  Association  therefore  instructs  its  President  and  Secretary, 
as  soon  as  may  be,  to  ask  the  authorities  having  in  charge  every 
known  physiological  laboratory  in  the  United  States,  whether  or  not 
they  will  accord  permission  to  the  President  of  the  local  Society, 
having  for  its  object  the  prevention  of  cruelty,  or  to  his  authorized 
representative  for  the  time  being,  the  right  of  admission  to  the  lab- 
oratory during  any  experiments  of  any  kind  upon  living  animals, 
simply  as  a  student  and  observer,  and  entirely  without  the  right  of 
suggestion,  criticism,  or  unsolicited  remarks  of  any  kind."' 


12  ABSOLUTE   PKOHIBITION   OF   VIVISECTION. 


I.     ABSOLUTE    PROHIBITION    OF    VIVISECTION. 

All  experimentation  upon  living  animals  we  consider  unnecessarj^, 
unjustifiable,  and  morally  wrong.  Some  of  the  highest  medical 
authorities  have  asserted  that  Vivisection  does  not  benefit  mankind; 
that  owing  largely  to  differences  between  the  structure  of  men  and 
animals,  the  results  of  operations  and  the  test  of  drugs  upon  the 
latter  are  wholly  misleading,  and  that  the  practice  has  accomplished 
nothing  of  real  value  in  the  treatment  of  disease.  The  greatest 
physiologist  of  our  century,  Sir  Charles  Bell,  declared  that  such 
''experiments  have  never  been  the  means  of  discovery;"  and  that 
"the  opening  of  living  animals  has  done  more  to  perpetuate  error 
than  to  enforce  the  just  views  taken  from  anatomy  and  natural 
science."  Mr.  Lawson  Tait,  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  living  sur- 
geons, claims  that  but  for  the  fallacies  of  Vivisection,  the  art  of  heal- 
ing would  be  to-day  "at  least  a  century  in  advance  of  its  present 
position;"  and  Dr.  Bell  Taylor,  one  of  the  leading  oculist-surgeons 
of  Great  Britain,  affirms  that  "  no  good  ever  came  from  the  practice, 
and  no  good  ever  will."  With  these  scientific  authorities  Ave  are  in 
perfect  accord. 

But  whether  any  useful  knowledge  can  be  thus  acquired  or  not  is 
beside  the  question.  Even  if  utility  could  be  proved,  man  has  no 
moral  right  to  attempt  to  benefit  himself  at  the  cost  of  injury,  pain, 
or  disease  to  the  lower  animals.  The  injury  which  the  'practice  of 
Vivisection  causes  to  the  moral  sense  of  the  individual  and  to  human- 
ity far  outweighs  any  possible  benefit  that  could  be  derived  froin  it. 
Dr.  Henry  J.  Bigelow,  Professor  in  the  Medical  School  of  Harvard 
University,  declared  that  "  Vivisection  deadens  the  humanity  of  the 
students."  Nothing  which  thus  lowers  morality  can  be  a  necessity 
to  progress. 

We  hold  the  infliction  of  torture  to  be  a  moral  offence ;  and  believe 
experience  has  demonstrated  that  Vivisection  cannot  be  sanctioned  in 
any  form  without  opening  a  door  to  that  offence.  We  assert  that  no 
legal  protection  from  the  utmost  extremity  of  torment  can  ever  be 
given  to  an  animal  when  once  it  is  laid  on  the  Vivisection  table  in  the 
laboratory;  and  that  no  line  can  be  drawn  between  experiments  that 
are  painless  and  those  involving  the  utmost  torture.  The  claim  that 
Vivisection  has  been  rendered  generally  painless  by  the  use  of  anaes- 
thetics is  wholly  misleading ;  for  physiologists  themselves  admit  that 
there  are  no  less  than  thirteen  classes  of  experiments  which  cannot 
be  satisfactorily  performed  on  anaesthetised  animals. 

To  allow  one  kind  of  Vivisection  because  "  painless  "  and  to  con- 
de-nn  another  because  '-  painful "  is  thus  utterly  impracticable.     No 


ABSOLUTE    PKOHIBITION   OF   VIVISECTION.  13 

distinctions  could  be  drawn  that  the  enthusiastic  experinienter  would 
regard,  and  no  legal  restrictions  are  possible  that  would  be  conscien- 
tiously observed.  Painless  or  painful,  useless  or  useful,  however 
severe  or  however  slight,  Vivisection  is  therefore  a  practice  so  linked 
with  cruelty,  and  so  pernicious  in  tendency,  that  any  reform  is 
impossible,  and  it  should  be  absolutely  prohibited  by  law  for  any 
purpose. 

Prof."  James  E.  Garretson,  M.  D.,  Senior  Professor  of  Surgery, 
Medico-Chirurgical  College,  Philadelphia :  — 

"I  am  without  words  to  express  my  horror  of  vivisection,  though  1  have 
been  a  teacher  of  anatomy  and  surgery  for  thirty  years.  It  serves  no  pur- 
pose that  is  not  better  served  after  other  manners." 

Forbes  Winslow,  D.  C.  L.  Oxon.,  M.  E.  C.  P.,  London,  Editor 
Journal  Psychological  Medicine ;  Physician  to  the  British  Hospital 
for  Mental  Diseases,  Physician  to  North  London  Hospital  for  Con- 
sumption, etc.  :  — 

"  In  my  opinion,  vivisection  has  opened  up  no  new  views  for  the  treat- 
ment and  cure  of  diseases.  It  is  most  unjustifiable  and  cruel,  and  in  no  way 
advances  medical  science.  I  do  not  believe  in  many  of  the  so-called  experi- 
ments* made  by  these  '  faddists,'  especially  those  relating  to  brain  operations 
on  monkeys  and  the  consequent  theory  of  cerebral  localization.  I  have 
probably  more  experience  than  many  of  these  experimenters  who  have  given 
their  opinions  to  the  world  as  based  on  what  they  have  done  ;  and  I  beg  leave 
to  express  my  utter  disbelief  in  the  usefulness  of  such  experiments,  and  to 
discredit  their  being  followed  by  any  good  results  to  mankind  or  to  science 
in  general." 

Et.  Hon.  A.  J.  Mundella,  F.  E.  S.,  London. 

Alfred  Eussell  Wallace,  F.  E.  S.,  D.  C.  L.  Oxon.,  LL.D.,  Author 
and  Naturalist :  — 

"  I  would  have  signed  II.  or  III.  but  that  I  consider  effectual  official  regu- 
lation impossible,  and  the  increase  of  official  inspectors  altogether  impolitic." 
(After  the  first  word  he  inserts  "  painful  or  injurious.") 

Edward  Berdoe  L.  E.  C.  P.  E.,  M.  E.,  C.  E.,  Physician  and  Sur- 
geon, London. 

Hon.  Justin  McCarthy,  M.  P.,  Author,  London. 

Prof.  William  J.  Morton,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Nervous  and  Men- 
tal Diseases  at  the  New  York  Post-Graduate  Medical  School  and 
Hospital,  New  York  City  :  — 

"  I  only  wish  I  could  state  the  above  sentiments  stronger.  If  mankind 
suffers  from  disease  it  is  its  own  fault,  to  be  cured  by  rectification  of  the 
causes  which  lead  to  it;  and  it  is  subversive  of  the  high  and  moral  order  of 
the  progress  of  humanity  to  inflict  pain  or  death  upon  other  living  animals  to 
abolish  or  minimize  disease  or  suffering  due  to  mankind's  own  faults.    In 


14  ABSOLUTE   PKOHIBITION   OF   VIVISECTION. 

the  end,  the  retribution  to  the  race  which  does  this  will  equal  and  offset  the 
advantages  temporarily  gained.  One  crime  or  fault  does  not  excuse  or 
justif)'  another." 

(To  Dr.  Morton's  father,  Dr.  W.  T.  G.  Morton,  the  world  owes  one  of 
the  greatest  blessings  of  this  or  any  other  age,  —  the  comparative  conquest 
of  pain  by  the  inhalation  of  ether.) 

B.  F.  Sherman,  M.  D.,  Ex-President  of  the  '^ew  York  State  Med- 
ical Society,  Ogdensburg,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  If  it  could  be  restricted  to  utility  and  without  pain,  it  would  be  all  right ; 
but  if  permitted  at  all,  it  will  be  abused." 

Edwin  A.  W.  Harlow,  A.  M.,  M.  D.  (Harvard),  Wollaston,  Mass. : 

"  The  late  Dr.  Henry  J.  Bigelow,  in  a  lecture,  which  I  heard,  before  the 

Harvard  College  Medical  School,  condemned  the  practice  of  some  of  the 

students  in  Paris  in  their  vivisections  on  horses,  without  anaesthetics,  as  '  in- 

fernul  inltumnnity.'    Vivisections  in  all  Medical  Schools  should  be  abolished." 

E.  H.  Hawks,  M.  D.,  Lynn,  Mass. :  — 

"I  believe  that  vivisection  blunts  the  moral  sense  to  such  a  degree  as  to 
become  a  strong  force  in  the  production  of  criminals." 

J.  D.  Buck,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Nervous  Diseases  and  the  Princi- 
ples of  Tlierapeutics,  and  Dean  of  Pulte  Medical  College,  Cincinnati, 
Ohio. 

Elmore  Palmer,  M.  D.,  President  (1890)  of  the  Western  New 
York  Medical  Society,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

William  Ingalls,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.:  — 

^'' Absolute  proldhilion ;  for  unless  a  law  can  be  made  which  no  one  can 
get  away  from,  vivisection  will  obtain  just  as  it  does  now." 

Allan  Mott-Ring,  M.  D.,  Arlington  Heights,  Mass.:  — 
"  Vivisection  is  an  unmanly  crime." 

Ira  Clark  Guptill,  M.  D.,  M.  S.,  JSTorthborough,  Mass. :  — 

"  No  legal  restrictions  would  be  conscientiously  observed,  and  therefore 
I  strike  for  absolute  prohibition  b}'  law." 

Alex.  S;  McClean,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass.  :  — 

"  Have  been  in  practice  forty-eight  years,  and  have  never  been  influenced 
or  governed  by  anything  I  have  seen  or  read  in  the  line  of  vivisection." 

Lorenzo  W.  Cole,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. :  — 

"  I  consider  it  barbarous  to  torture  anything  capable  of  feeling  pain,  to 
demonstrate  facts  which  have  been  proven  thousands  of  times." 

Rt.  Rev.  John  Scarborough,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  New  Jersey. 
Rt.  Rev.  John  Williams,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  Bishop  of  Connecticut. 


ABSOLUTE    PROHIBITION    OF    VIVISECTION.  15 

Kt.  Rev.  Hugh  Miller  Thompson,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  Mississippi. 

Rt.  Rev.  J.  H.  D.  Wingfield,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  N.  California. 

The  Very  Rev.  E.  A.  Hoffman,  D.  D.,  D.  C.  L.,  Dean  of  the  Gen- 
eral Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

Rev.  Dr.  Lyman  Whitney  Allen,  Newark,  jST.  J.  :  — 

"  If  vivisection  could  be  absolutely  without  pain,  I  should  be  willing  to 
advocate  it  under  certain  restrictions.  But  who  shall  be  the  judge  ?  As  it 
is  at  present  conducted,  it  is  immoral  and  wicked.  The  only  safe  and  Chris- 
tian standpoint  is  absolute  prohibition.  Science  has  its  limits,  as  have  other 
branches  of  investigation.  Valuable  and  important  as  is  biological  study, 
life  and  animal  individuality  and  consciousness  have  their  God-given  rights." 

Rev.  Dr.  G.  H.  De  Bevoise,  Keene,  N.  H. :  — 

"Although  never  having  occasion  to  protest  against  an  act  of  this  kind 
because  of  knowledge  of  its  occurrence,  I  am  most  decidedly  in  favor  of  the 
absolute  prohibition  of  vivisection,  if  this  may  be  accomplished.  The  end  in 
view  by  no  means  justifies  the  means,  and  very  often  the  enthusiasm  of 
scientific  investigation  overrides  all  humane  considerations,  and  is  willing 
that  there  may  be  any  amount  of  suffering  if  only  ambition  may  accomplish 
its  end.   Vivisection  is  more  than  cruel.    It  is  wicked  cruelty,  concentrated." 

Rev.  Dr.  Amory  H.  Bradford,  Associate  Editor  of  ''  The  Out- 
look," New  York :  — 

"  I  incline  to  a  middle  ground  between  I.  and  II.,  but  prefer  to  sign 
the  first." 

President  Henry  Morton,  Ph.  D.,  Stevens  Institute  of  Tech- 
nology, Hoboken,  N.  J. 

President  David  C.  John,  D.  D.,  Clark  University,  Ga. 
President  G.  W.  Holland,  Ph.  D.,  Newbury,  S.  C. 
President  Lawr.  Larsbn,  Norwegian  Luther  College,  Iowa. 

(Omits  first  paragraph,  the  reference  to  Dr.  Bigelow,  and  the  last  sentence 
of  the  third  paragraph.) 

President  McK.  H.  Chamberlin,  LL.  B.,  McKendree  College, 
Illinois. 

Samuel  S.  Garst,  M.  D.,  Ph.  D.,  Ashland  University,  Ohio. 
President  L.  L.  Hobbs,  A.M.,  Guilford  College,  N.  C. 
President  Jesse  Johnson,  A.  M.,  Muskingum  College,  Ohio  :  — 
"No  set  of  men  may  limit  the  application  of  the  moral  law." 

President  John  Van  Ness  Standish,  LL.  D.,  Lombard  Univer- 
sity, 111. 

President  John  Braden,  Central  Tenn.  College,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

President  "William  F.  Shedd,  D.  D.,  Acting  President  of  Little 
Rock  University,  Little  Rock,  Ark. 

President  H.  J;  Kiekhoefer,  A.M.,  Northwestern  College,  111. 


16     •  ABSOLUTE   PROHIBITION   OF   VIVISECTION. 

President  E,  Benjamin  Bierman,  Ph.  D.,  Lebanon  Valley  College, 
Penn. 

President  C.  W.  Carter,  D.  D.,  Centenary  College,  La. 
President  W.  F.  Melton,  Ph.D.,  Florida  Conference  College,  Fla, : 
"  Vivisection  without  restrictions  is  devilish." 

President  W.  P.  Johnston,  D.  D.,  Geneva  College,  Penn. 
President    Tamerlane   P.    Marsh,    Mt.    Union  College,    Albion, 
Ohio  :  — 

"  My  judgment  is  based  on  the  accuracy  and  authority  of  the  scientists 
quoted.     If  inaccurate,  I  should  sign  No.  III." 

Prof.  J.  P.  WiDNEY,  President  of  the  University  of  Southern  Cali- 
fornia, Los  Angeles,  Cal. 

Prof.  Francis  J.  Wagner,  A.  M.,  D.  D.,  President  of  Morgan 
College,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Eev.  J.  C.  Clapp,  T>.  D.,  President  of  Catawba  College,  Newton,  N.  C. 

Eev.  James  W.  Strong,  President  of  Carleton  College,  Northfield, 
Minn. 

Eev.  Wm.  Henslee,  President  of  Pierce  Christian  College,  College 
City,  Cal. 

Eev.  Merle  A.  Breed,  President  of  Benzonia  College,  Benzonia, 
Mich. 

President  Isaac  N.  Eendall,  Lincoln  University,  Lincoln,  Pa. 

President  George  Hindley,  Eidgeville  College,  Eidgeville,  Ind. : 
"  Absolute  prohibition  of  vivisection  until  man  is  absolutely  regenerated." 

President  Jas.  T.  Coote,  A.  M.,  Washington  College,  Tenn. 

President  J.  P.  Greene,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  William  Jewell  College, 
Liberty,  Mo. 

President  Charles  A.  Blanc  hard,  Wheaton  College,  Wheaton,  111. 

William  H.  Payne,  LL.  D.,  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Nash- 
ville, Tenn. 

Prof.  Hiram  Corson,  LL.  D.,  Professor  of  English  Literature, 
'Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  Charles  Mellen  Tyler,  A.  M.,  D.  D.,  Professor  of  Christian 
Ethics,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  W.  S.  Tyler,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  Professor  of  Greek,  Amherst 
College,  Mass. 

Prof.  Harry  T.  Peck,  A.  M.,  Ph.  D.,  Professor  of  Latin  Language 
and  Literature,  Columbia  College,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  G.  C.  Wheeler,  B.  S.,  Ph.  D.,  Chair  of  Chemistry,  Cornell 
University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  S.  G.  Williams,  A.  B.,  Ph.  D.,  Professor  of  the  Art  of  Teach- 
ing, Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 


ABSOLUTE    PEOHIBITION    OF   VIVISECTION.  .  17 

Prof.  A.  M.  Wheeler,  M.  A.,  Professor  of  History,  Yale  Univer- 
sity^ ^^w  Haven,  Conn. 

Prof.  Geokge  B.  Stevens,  Ph.  D.,  D.  D.,  Professor  of  l^ew  Testa- 
ment Criticism,  Yale  University,  New  Haven,  Conn, 

Prof.  William  Cleaver  Wilkinson,  University  of  Chicago. 

Prof.  Edward  Lee  Greene,  Catliolic  University  of  America, 
Washington,  D.  C. 

Prof.  Arvin  S.  Olin,  University  of  Kansas. 

Prof.  Edward  E.   Hale,  Jr.,  State  University,  Iowa  :  — 

"  I  should  much  prefer  to  sign  IT.  or  III.,  if  it  were  not  that  I  see  no 
practicable  way  of  restricting  vivisection.  If  it  were  possible  to  draw  the 
line  between  painful  and  painless  vivisection,  between  needful  and  useless 
vivisection,  it  would  be  almost  impossible  to  have  the  line  observed.  If 
any  way  could  be  shown  that  would  surely  accomplish  this  end,  I  should 
sign  III." 

(Professor  Hale  erases  all  statements  of  fact  which  he  has  not  means  of 
verifying.) 

Prof.  W.  H.  Savage,  El  Paso,  Texas  :  — 

"  Under  limitations  it  might  do  to  delegate  to  a  very  few  eminent  men  the 
right  to  make  some  experiments;  but  such  experiments  should  not  be  made 
before  a  body  of  students.  Even  to  advance  science,  we  have  no  right  to 
torture  animals." 

Prof.  James  Otis  Lincoln,  San  Mateo,  Cal. 
Prof.  William  E.  Phelps,  M.  A.,  St.  Paul,  Minn. 
Charles  W.  Stone,  A.  M.  (Harvard),  Boston. 
Eev.  Dr.  PIiram  C.  Hayden,  Vice-President  of  the  Western  Eeserve 
University,  Cleveland,  Ohio  :  — 

"Signed  on  strength  of  the  testimony  of  the  medical  experts,  quoted 
above." 

Prof.  Nathan  Abbott,  LL.  B.,  Professor  of  Law,  Leland  Stanford 
Jr.  University,  Palo  Alto,  Cal. 


M.  L.  Holbrook,  M.  D.  (Prof.  Hygiene  in  New 
York  Med.  College.  Editgr  "Journal  of 
Hygiene,"),  New  York. 

Julius  F.  Krug,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Horace  C.  Taylor,  M.  D.,  Brockton,  N.  Y. 

Isnac  D.  Meacham,  M.  D..  Binghanitou,  N.  Y. 

Wm.  P.  Roberts,  M.  D.,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 

Herbert  Beals,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

D.  A.  Dean,'M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

E.  A.  Burnside,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
0.  M.  Frisbie,  M.  D.,  Bainbridge,  N.  Y. 
G.  H.  R.  Bennet,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
P.  Pryne,  M.  D.,  Herkimer,  N.  Y.:  — 

*!  am  opposed  to  vivisection  under  all  cir- 
cumstances, without  reservation." 


Jesse  Myer,  M.  D.,  Kingston,  N.  Y.:  — 
"  The  sentiments  of  the  statement  for 
'  Vivisection  without  restrictions  '  are 
appropriate  to  tlie  Dark  Ages.  The  bar- 
barism of  the  Turk  would  blush  to  hear 
them." 

Howard  Wetmore,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Peter  B.  Wyckoff,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Thos.  M.  Dillingham,  M.  D.,  New  York  Cit3\ 

Follansbee  G.  Welch,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Lewis  Hallock,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Luigi  Galvani  Doane,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Jas.  R.  Bird,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Christian  Enrich,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Addison  C.  Fletcher,  M.  D.,  New  York  City, 


18 


ABSOLUTE    PEOHIBITION    OF   VIVISECTION. 


Jas.  H.  Patton,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
William  P.  Morrissj-,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
B.  Fincke,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Jas.  E.  Ruseell,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Jas.  Murphy,  M.  D.,  Sherman,  N.  Y. 
Jas.  P.  Hawes,  M.  D.,  North  Hector,  Schuyler 

Co.,  N,  Y. 
Hiram  C.  Driggs,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Wm.  G.  Hartley,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
S.  B.  Childs,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
John  Cooper,  M.  D.,  M.  K.  C.  S.,  Brooklyn, 

New  York. 
Geo.  W.  Newman,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

B.  B.  Roberts,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.Y. 
John  F.  Wage,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
F.  W.  Stilwell,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
John  H.  Eden,  M.  D.  (Yale,  1874),  Fordiiam 

Heights,  N.  Y. 
Thos.  B.  Herimstreet,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. 

C.  E.  Eraser,  M.  D.,  Rome,  N.  Y. 
John  Reid,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

A.  R.  Green,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. 
Herman  Beyer,  M.  D.,  Stapleton,  N.  Y. 

W.  W.  Archer,  M.  D.,  Clifton  Springs,  N.Y. 
Wilson  T.  Bassett,  M.  D.,  Cooperstown,N.  Y. 

B.  C.  Andrews,  M.  D.,  Dansville,  N.  Y. 
David  J.  Mallery,  M.  D.,  Bristol  Centre,  N.  Y. 

B.  D.  Mosher,  M.  D.,  Granville,  N.  Y. 
W.  W.  Whiting,  M.  D.,  Union,  N.  Y. 
W.  E.  Gorton,  M.  D.,  Corning,  N.  Y. 
Theodore    C.    Wallace,    M.    D.,  Cambridge, 

New  York. 

C.  J.  Farley,  M.  D.,  Sandy  Hill,  N.  Y. 
William  C.  Cooke,  M.  D.,  Moravia,  N.  Y. 
Peter  H.  Hulst,  M.  D.,  Greenwich,  N.  Y. 
Albert  H.   Crump,  M.  D.,  Williams  Bridge, 

New  York. 
W.  D.  0.  K.  Strong,  M.  D.,  Fi<hkilI-on-Hud- 

son,  N.  Y. 
C.  V.  H.  Morris,  M.  D.,  Lodi,  N.  Y. 
J.  J.  Aliman,  M.  D.,  Union  Springs,  N.  Y. 
J.   B.    Hartwell,  M.  D.,  Woodsburgh,  N.  Y. 
W.  W.  Budlong,  M.  D.,  Frankfort,  N.  Y. 
Newton  Cook,  M.  D.,  Sandy  Creek,  N.  Y. 
R.  R.  Thompson,  M.  D.,  Kingston,  N.  Y. 
James  H.Rogers,  M.D.,  East  Hampton,  N.Y. : 
'*  The  vivisector  is  only  less  guilty  than  the 
man  or  woman  who  kills  or  maims  an 
animal  for  amusement,  or  in  obedience 
to  the  dictates  of  fashion." 

Jos.  Sidney  Crane,  M.  D.,  Huntington,  N.  Y. 
Charles  T.  Mitchel,  M.  D.,  Canandaigua,  N.Y. 
Horace  Halbert,  M.  D.,  Canastota,  N.  Y. 
Wm.  G.  Ware,  M.  D.,  Dedham,  Mass. 
C.  K.  Beldin,  M.  D.,  Jamaica,  N.  T. 
C.  T.  Greenleaf,  M.  D.,  Brewerton,  N.  Y. 
A.  J.  Evans,  M.  D.,  Fredonia,  N.  Y. 


Ezra  McDougall,   M.  D.    (Univ.  Med.    Coll.- 
N.  Y.),  Oneonta,  N.  Y. :  — 
'■  I  have  never  derived  anj-  benefit  from  the 
practice  of  vivisection." 

Wm.  M.  Gwynn,  M.D.,  ThroopsviUe,  N.  Y. 

J.  Fenimore  Niver,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  N.  Y. 

Ira  D.  Brown,  M.  D.,  Weedsport,  N.  Y.:  — 
"Every  word  in  the  above  statement  I 
know  to  be  true.  The  practice  of  vivi- 
section is  inhuman,  cruel,  and  brutal- 
izing in  its  effects  upon  those  who 
witness  it,  wliile  no  information  useful 
to  the  human  family  is  gained  from  it. 
In  our  medical  colleges  it  is  indulged 
in  as  a  sport,  a  pastime,  to  the  moral 
degradation  of  the  students,  making 
thein  unfit  for  the  practice  of  the  heal- 
ing art." 

Geo.  A.  Stuart,  M.  D.  (Harvard),  Oyster  Bay, 
Queens  Co.,  N.  Y. 

T.  J.  Peer,  M.  D.,  Ontario,  N.  Y. 

T.  J.  Kilmer,  M.  D.,  Schoharie,  N.  Y. 

Jas.  S.  Raymond,  M.  D.,  Ogdensburg,  N.  Y. 

John  Vedder,  M.  D.,  Saugerties,  N.  Y. 

H.  J.  Nims,  M.  D.,  Manlius,  N,  Y. 

Dr.  L.  Jeschinsky,  M.  D.,  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y. 

A.  B.  Carpenter,  M.  D.,  N.  Greece,  N.  Y. 
Chas.  E.  Smith,  M.  D.,  Wiiitesboro,  N.  Y. 
Samuel  S.  Wallian,  M.  D.,  Helix,  San  Diego 

Co.,  Cal. 

Sarah  E.  Wilder,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Alice  Borle  Campbell,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.Y. 
(member  of  the  consulting  staff  of  the 
jMemorial  Hospital,  Brooklyn,  and  mem- 
ber of  the  consulting  staff  of  the  New  York 
Medical  College  and  Hospital  for  Women). 

Adele  A.  Gleason,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

Sarah  E.  Bissell,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. :  — 
''  Vivisection    is    useless,    degrading,    bru- 
talizing." 

Georgiana  M.  Crosby,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Eliza  Ellinwood,  M.  D.,  Rome,  N.  Y. 

Rachel  T.  Speakman,  M.  D.,  West  Chester,  Pa. 

Jeannette  B.  Greene.  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

S.  A.  Skinner,  M.  D.,  Hoosac  Falls,  N.  Y. 

(Miss)  S.  S.  Nivison,  M.  D.,  Dryden.  N.  Y. 

Miles  B.  .Jones,  M.  D.,  Camden,  N.  Y. 

P.  Rebekah  Johnson,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Mary  Siade,  M.  D.,  Castile,  N.  Y. 

L.  S.  Sprague,  M.  D.,  Williamson,  N.  Y. 

B.  F.  Underwood,  M.  D.,  Arlington,  N.  J. 
D.  S.  Woodworth,  M.  D.,  Fitchburg,  Mass. 

I.  Eaton  Chase,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Haverhill,  Mass. 
A.  Houghton  Kimball,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Francis  M.  Cragin,  M.  D.,  Norwood,  ^Mass. 
M.  H.  Williams,  M.  D..  New  York  City. 
John  F.  Miller,  M.  D,,  New  York  City. 


ABSOLUTE    PEOHIBITION   OF   VIVISECTION. 


19 


W.  H.  Krause,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Julin  D.  QuacJienbos,  M.  D.,  New  York  Citj'. 
James  Neil,  M.  U.,  New  York  Cit}-  (I^xainin- 

iiig  Surgeon  for  the  U.  S.  Pension  Bureau 

from  18G2  to  1867). 
Franz  Heuel,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
M.  A.  B.  Mount,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
H.  Clay  Paddock,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Matthew  Woods,  M.  D.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
T.  Griswold  Comstock,  A.  M  ,  M.  D.,  Ph.D., 

St.  Louis,  Mo. 
W.  A.  Earle,  M.  D.,  Chairman  of  the  Board  of 

Health,  West  Boylston,  Mass. 
James  P.  Broderick,  M.   D.,  Jamaica  Plain, 

Mass. 
Daniel  D.  Slade,  M.  D.,  Chestnut  Hill,  Mass. 
E.  Herbert  No3'es,  M.  D.,  West  Gloucester, 

Mass. 
G.  Colburn  Clement,  M.  D.,  Haverhill,  Mass. 
James  P.  Elliot,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Caroline  E.  Hastings,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Charles  H.  Shackford,  M.  D.,  Physician  and 

Surgeon,  Frost  Hospital,  Chelsea,  Mass. 
N.  G.  Macomber,  M.  D.,  "Westport,  Mass. 
Francis  J.  Stevens,  M.  D.,  Boxford,  Mass. 
James  D.  Judge,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
John  B.  Tyler,  M.  D.,  Billerica,  JMass. 
Alfred  L.  S.  Morand,  M.  D.,  Jamaica  Plain, 

Mass. 
Drs.  Sturtevant  and  Hallowell,   Hyde  Park, 

Mass. 
James  Warwick,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
J.  B.  Conklin,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Sarah  E.  Sherman,  M.  D.,  Salem,  Mass. 
Julia  B.  Wood,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
Charlotte  Evans  Page,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  Mass. 
Harriet  N.  Watson,  M.  D.,  Albion,  N.  Y. 
Wm.  M.  Moore,  M.  D.,  Provincetown^  Mass. 
J.  G.  Johnson,  M.  D.,  Wellfleet,  Mass. 
William  R.  Hayden,  M.  D.,  Bedford  Springs, 

Mass. :  — 
"  Vivisection  serves  no  good  purpose;  and  I 
agree  with  Dr.  Bigelow." 
Henry  R.  Brissett,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  Mass. 

B.  Hubbard,  M.  D.,  Plymouth,  Mass. 
Walter  E.    Harvey,    M.  D.,  Cambridgeport, 

Mass. 
Walter  S.  Hall,  M.  D.,  Medford.  IMass. 
M.  F.  Delano,  M.  D.,  Late  Surgeon  of  the 

U.  S.  Armv,  Sandwich,  Mass. 
L.  V   Gibbs,  M.  D.,  Worthington,  Mass. 

C.  T.  Stanle}-,  M.  D.,  Amesbury,  .Mass. 
G.  E.  White,  M.  D.,  Sandwich," Mass. :  — 

"  The  first  statement  more  accurately  meets 
my  views  than  any  other.  There  may 
be  circumstances  where  it  would,  be  of 
great  benefit." 


John  T.  Harris,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
J.  B.  Andrews,  M.  D.,  Lynn,  Mass. 
James  B.  Bell,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Homer  S.  Bell,  M.  D.,  Granby,  Mass. 
Bj'ron  R.  Harmon,  M.  D.,  Woburn,  Mass. 
Charles  Kingsbury,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
George  H.  Payne,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.  • 
Charles  E.  Nichols,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.    ' 
Marcus  F.  Bridgman,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

E.  J.  Gooding,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Z.  A.  Spendley,  M.  D.,  Ciienango  Forks,  N.  Y. 
Nathaniel  M.  Freeman,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
George  F.  Oertel,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

F.  E.  Martindale,  M.D.,  Port  Richmond,  N.Y. 
J.  M.  Turner,  M.  D.,  Lyons,  N.  Y. 
Adelbert  D.  Head,  M.  D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Gilbert  R.  .Traver,  M.  D.,  Perry,  N.  Y. 
David  Edward  Collins,  M.  D.,  Medway,  N.  Y. 
Thos.  W.  Bennett,  M.  D.,  Jeffersonville,  N.  Y. 
Elizabeth  H.  Bates,  M.  D.,  Port  Chester,  N.  Y. : 

"Operations  can  be  done  on  dogs  and  other 
animals  that  owing  to  differences  in 
organs  cannot  be  done  on  human 
beings.  Vivisection  may  show  curious 
things,  but  at  the  expense  of  the  inhu- 
manity of  man." 

T.  S.  Quick,  M.  D.,  Carrollton,  N.  Y.   ' 

Chas.  O.  Hawkins,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

James  I.  Marcley,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Timothy  Dwight  Stow,  M.  D.,  Mexico,  N.  Y. 

H.  Hadley  Smith,  M.'D.,  Hudson,  N.  Y. 

A.  B.  Rice,  M.  D.,  Jamestown,  N.  Y. 

J.  F.  Cleveland,  M.  D.,  Le  Roy,  N.  Y. 

A.  C.  Miller,  M.  D.,  Turin,  N."  Y. 

John  Murphy,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Fred  C.  Robin.son,  M.  D.,  New  York  Git}'. 

Dr.  Edward  Frankell,  M.  D.,  Consulting 
Surgeon  to  the  City  Hospital,  New  York 
City. 

J.  W.  Ferris,  M.  D.,  Mount  Vernon,  N.  Y. 

Alfred  Large,  M.  D.,  Great  Barrington,  Mass. 

Charles  M.  Brockway,  M.  D.  (College  Physi- 
cian and  Surgeon,  New  York),  Worcester, 
Mass. 

Thomas  B.  Shaw,  LL.B.,  M.  D.  (Harvard), 
Lowell,  Mass. 

Edgar  Leroy  Draper,  A.  M.,  M.  D.  (Harvard), 
Holyoke,  Mass. 

John  H.  Keyser,  Hartford,  Conn. 

M.  M.  Averill,  M.  D.,  Lynn,  Mass. 

Stephen  Witt,  M.  D.,  North  Dana,  Mass. 

S.  Saltmarsh,  M.  D.,  Lexington,  INIass. 

G.  W.  Burdett,  M.  D.,  Clinton,  Mass. 
William  P„  Burge,  M.  D.,  Westfield,  Mass. 
C.  H.  Harriman,  M.  D.,  Whitinsville,  Mass 
A.  C.  Lane,  M.  D.,  West  Medford,  Mass. 
Horace  M.  Nash,  M.  D.,  Lancaster,  Mass. 


20 


ABSOLUTE    PROHIBITION    OF   VIVISECTION. 


Edward   T.    Tucker,    M.  D.,  New   Bedford, 
Mass. 

Thomas  A.  Capen,  M.  D,,  Fall  River,  Mass. 

Colby  Lamb,  M.  D.,  Salem,  Mass. 

Benj.  Benoit,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  Mass.:  — 

"Have  always  looked  upon  vivisection  as 
.  cruel  in  the  extreme." 

Lorenzo  Waite,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Pittstield,  Mass. 

William  L.  Johnson,  M.  D.,  Uxbridge,  Mass. 

Seth  W.    Kelley,    A.   M.,   M.   D.,   Woburn, 
Mass. 

C.  "W.  Bowen,  M.  D.,  Westfield,  Mass. 

David  W.  Hodgkiiis,  M.  D.,  East  Brookfield, 
Mass. 

Rosto  O.  "Wood,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 

Charles  F.  Sherman,  M.  I).,  Haverhill,  Mass. 

George  A.  Coburn,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Cambridge, 
Mass. 

v.  L.  Owen,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 

Isaac  Thorndike  Hunt,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Marshall  L.  Brown,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  Robert  R.  Booth,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  Dr.  Arthur  Brooks,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  Dr.  Chas.  E.  Robinson, Scranton,  Pa. 

Rev.  Dr.  J.  Clement  French,  Newark,  N.  J. 

Rev.  Dr.  James  B.  Gregg,  Colorado  Springs. 

Rev.  Dr.  Burdett  Hart,  New  Haven,  Conn. 

Rev.  Dr.  H.  Nelson  Hollifield,  Newark,  N.  J. 

Rev.  Dr.  John  R.  Davies,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  Dr.  John  V.  L.  Reynolds,  Meadville,Pa. 

Rev.  Dr.  Levi  Parsons,  Mt.  Morris,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  William  C.  Hopkins,  Toledo,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Dr.  C.  H.  Rogers,  Oklahoma  City. 

Rev.  Dr.  Alex  Kent,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Rev.  Dr.  Francis  E.  Miller,  Paterson,  N.J. 

Rev.  Dr.  John  W.  Brown,  New  York  City. 

Rev.    Dr.   Epher   "Whitaker,    Southold,   New- 
York. 

Rev.  Dr.  Robert  Court,  Lowell,  Mass.:  — 
"M}'  mind  has  hovered  between  I.  and  II.," 
but  has  finally  resolved  to  I.  as  safest, 
most  humane,  and  most  in  accordance 
with  the  mind  of  Him  who  '  made  and 
loveth  all.'  " 

Rev.  Dr.  Charles  J.  Jones,  Stapleton,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  Dewitt  M.  Benham,  Ph.  D.,  Pitts- 
burg, Pa. 

Rev.  Dr.  D.  Hall,  Indiana.  Pa. 

Rev.  Dr.  James  Henry  Ecob,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  Rhys  G.  Jones,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  A.  St.- John  Chambr^,  Arch-Deacon 
of  Lowell,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  James  J.  Biird,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  il.  Clarke,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  Edmund  B.  Willson,  Salem,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  Edward  T.   Fairbanks,  St.  Johns- 
bury,  Vermont. 


Rev.  John  A.  Bellows,  Portland,  Maine. 

Rev.  James  Kay  Applebee,  Allston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Otis  A.  Glazebrook,  Elizabeth,  N.  J. 

Rev.  Geo.  Augustine  Thayer,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Frederick  S.  Sill,  Cohoes,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Ithamar  W.  Beard,  Dover,  N.  H.  :  — 
"  I  indorse  this  view,  not  only  on  account 
of  the  pain  inflicted,  but  more  especially 
because  of  the  statement  that  '  vivi- 
section deadens  humanity.'  I  can  con- 
ceive no  benefit  that  can  come  to  our 
race  commensurate  with  -this  great 
harm." 

Rev.  Ernest  Smith,  M.  A.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Rev.  James  Holwell,  Kioder,  Owego,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Robert  Hudson,  Svracuse,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Stephen  Peebles,  Satauk,  Colorado. 

Rev.  James  H.  Darlington,  Bi'ookh-n,  N.  Y. 

Rev. Floyd  W.  Tompkins,  Jr.,  Providence,  R.I. 

Rev.  Dr.  Joshua  Young,  Groton,  Mass. 

Rev.    William    Brunton,    B.  D.    (Harvard), 
"Whitman,  Mass. 

Rev.  A.  J.  Chapin,  Omaha,  Neb. 

Rev.  E.  M.  Hiclvok,  Sharon,  Mass.:  — 

"No  permanent  good  results  can  come  to 
humanity  from  such  violation  of  God's 
law  of  love." 

Rev.  John  T.  Rose,  Cazenovia,  New  York. : ' 
"  If  it  were  within   my   power,   I   should 
absolutely    prohibit    vivisection,    and 
visit  the  crime   with  legal   and  social 
penalties." 

Rev.  George  G.  Perrine,  Guildford,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  T.  Lewis  Banister,  New  Hartford,  N  Y. : 
"No  human  being  has  the  right  to  inflict 
torture  upon  an  inferior  order  of  beings 
incapable  of  determining  aud  express- 
ing voluntary  choice.  If,  however,  any 
heroic  human  being  in  full  possession 
of  all  his  reasoning  faculties,  ascertained 
as  such  by  such  legal  process  as  deter- 
mines cases  of  insanity  by  due  exami- 
nation, who  at  the  time  of  sucli  exanii- 
nation,  after  being  pronounced  sane, 
declares  his  willingness  to  become  a 
martyr  to  science,  — let  him." 

Rabbi  L.  "V^'eiss,  Columbus,  Ohio. 
Rabbi  Henry  Cohen,  Galveston,  Texas. 
Rabbi  Max  Wertheimer,  Dayton,  Ohio. 
Rev.  D.  R.  Hardison,  Italy,  Texas. 
Rev.  C.  R.  D.  Crittenton,  Chicago,  111. 
Rev.  John  C.  Kimball,  Hartford,  Conn. 
(Adds,  "  and  by  appeals  to  reason,'  senti- 
ment, and  moral  principle.") 
Rev.  Stephen  H.  Camp,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  James  Huxtable,  Boston,  Mass. 


ABSOLUTE    PROHIBITION    OF   VIVISECTION. 


21 


Rev.  James  De  Nonnandie,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Archdeacon  Gilbert  F.  Williams,  Wash- 
ington, D.  C. 

Rev.  Archdeacon  J.  D.  Morrison,  D.  D., 
LL.  D.,  Ogdensburg. 

Rev.  E.  F.  H.  J.  Masse,  B.  A.,  Oxon.,  Chicago. 

Rev.  Hobart  Cooke,  Plattsburg,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  George  Clark  Houghton,  U.  D.,  Hoboken. 

Rev.  Eaton  W.  Maxc_v,  Troj',  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Nathan  F.  Whiting,  Cape  Vincent,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  S.  W.  Miller,  Saltsburg,  Pa. :  — 
"  For  j'ears  I  favored  II.  Could  I  believe 
it  practicable,  I  might  still  favor  it; 
but  the  seeming  impossibility  of  making 
it  so.  the  liability  to  abuse  in  the  hands 
of  unprincipled  persons,  and  the  fact 
that  in  many  cases  the  use  of  anoes- 
thetics  defeats  the  purpose,  compels  me 
to  adopt  1." 

Rev.  F.  N.  Palmer,  Pueblo,  Colo. 

Rev.  Geo.  W.  Chalfant,  D.  D.,  Pittsburg,  Pa. 

Rev.  Theodore  F.  Wright,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

Rev.  Joseph  Dunn  Burrell,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Randolph  H.  McKim,  Wasliington,  D.  C. 

Rev.  Chas.  F.  J.  VVrigley,  M.A.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  William  Marshall,  Coudersport.  Pa. 

Rev.  James  Alex.  Dickson,  Governor's 
Island,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Charles  M.  Armstrong,  West  Phila- 
delphia, Pa. 

Rev.  William  Cooke,  Oriskany,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  David  S.  McCaslin,  D.  D.,  Minneapolis, 
Minnesota. 

Rev.  James  N.  Chalmers,  Lonsdale,  R.  I. 

Rev.  Percy  Stickney  Grant,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  F.  P.  Berry,  Maryville,  Mo. 

Rev.  Benjamin  F.  Matran,  A.M.,  Chicago,  111. : 
"Vivisection  degrades  — superinduces  bru- 
tality and  indifference  to  pain  of 
others." 

Rev.  Wm.  A.  McCorker,  Detroit,  Mich. :  — 
"  Unless  vivisection  is  absolutely  necessary 
to  protect  human  life  and  to  guard 
against  human  suffering,  I  am  perfectly 
clear  that  it  should  not  be  practised. 
Whether  there  is  ever  such  necessity  I 
hardly  feel  competent  to  decide.  If  there 
ever  is  such  occasion  for  its  practice,  it 
should  be  rendered  painless.  I  think 
my  place  is  with  those  absolutely  pro- 
hibiting it." 

Rav.  Wm.  C.  Pond,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 
Rev.  Washington  R.  Laird,  West  Chester,  Pa. 
Rev.  Lester  L.  West,  D.D.,  Winona,  Minn. 
Rev.  Elwell  0.  Mead,  A.  M.,  Burton,  Ohio. 
Rev.  J.  C.  Ely,  Xenia,  Ohio. 


Rev.  Elisha  Gifford,  Cambridge,  Mass.  :  — 
"  We  believe  that  animals  have  rights  and 
should  be  protected  from  cruelty  :  the 
inhumanity  and  barbarism  of  vivisec- 
tion seem  certain,  its  good  effects  are 
doubtful  ;  the  first  position  therefore 
seems  to  us  the  correct  one,  that  the 
practice  should  be  abolished,  under 
pains  and  penalties." 

Rev.  Albert  F.  Pierce,  Danbury,  Conn.  :  — 
"  I  cannot  indorse  all  in  the  statement  made 
above.  My  opinion  is  that  no  such 
benefit  results  from  vivisection  as  war- 
rants the  practice  of  it;  therefore  my 
judgment  as  well  as  my  sj'mpathies  are 
strong!}'  against  it.  /fit  cun  be  shown 
that  great  good  has  resulted  to  human 
life  either  in  the  treatment  of  or  preven- 
tion of  disease,  which  good  could  not 
have  come  through  other  methods  of 
investigation,  then  I  should  favor  the 
'  second '  statement,  but  under  the 
most  stringent  regulations.  But  it  will 
take  a  great  deal  more  evidence  than  I 
have  yet  seen  to  produce  such  a  convic- 
tion in  my  own  mind.  For  this  reason 
I  am  strongly  opposed  to  vivisection  in 
any  form." 

Rev.  F.  A.  Warfield,  Brockton,  Mass.    ' 

Rev.  J.  T.   Sunderland,  A.    M.,  Ann   Arbor, 
Michigan. 

Mrs.    Eliza  R.  Sunderland,  Teacher  of  His- 
tory, Ann  Arbor,  Mich. 

Rev.  John  H.  Morison,  D.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.  : 
"I  should  prefer  to  sign  No.  II.  were  it 
not  that,  when  once  engaged  in  vivi- 
section without  pain,  the  operator  is 
veiy  liable  to  be  carried  beyond  his 
expectations." 

Rev.  E.  C.  Butler,  Quiney,  Mass. 

Rev.  J.  M.  G.  Foster,  Bangor,  Maine. 

Rev.  J.  F.  Loba,  Evanston,  III. 

Rev.  Wm.  M.  Jones,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Rev.  D.  H.  Temple,  Los  Gatos,  Cal. 

Rev.  J.  Edw.  Rielly,  Hancock,  Mich. 

Rev.  David  Stuart  Hamilton,  Columbia,  Pa. 

Rev.  Edwin  Pond  Parker,  Hartford,  Conn. 

Rev.  Jos.  S.  Jenckes,  Indianapolis,  Ind. 

Rev.  Daniel  L.  Furber,  Newton  Centre,  Mass 

Rev.  Thomas  H.  Cocroft,  Providence,  R.  I. 

Rev.  Edward  C.  Porter.  Watertown,  Mass. 

Rev.  Edward  Norton,  Quiney,  Mass. 

Rev.  S.  Wright  Butler,  D.  D.,  Omaha,  Neb. 

Rev.  Albert  Buel  Vorse,  Wellesley  Hills. 

Rev.  P.  A.  Gleason,  Wakeman,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Wm.  Wallace,  Calumet,  Mich. 

Rev.  Chas.  Addison  Northup,  Norwich,  Conn. 


22 


ABSOLUTE    PROHIBITION    OF   VIVISECTION. 


Rev.  George  A.  Tewksbury,  Concord,  Mass. 
Rev.  George  M.  Bartol,  Lancaster,  Mass. 
Rev.Dr.Tlioinas  C.Easton,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Rev.  Asher  Anderson,  Meriden,  Conn. 
Rev.  J.  S.  Plunier,  Cadiz,  Ohio. 
Henry  S.  Clubb,  Editoi',  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Rev.W.  Moore  Jones,  M.  A.,  Murphysboro,  111. 
Rev.  Arthur  W.  Spooner,  Camden,  N.  J. 
(Erases  1st  sentence  of  2d  paragraph.) 
Rev.  Dr.  Henry  B.  Cromwell,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Eugene  A.  Johnson,  Washington.  D.  C. 
Rev.  Walter  II.  Waygood,  Schenectady,  N.  Y. 
Rev.    William    Rounseville    Alger,    Author, 

Boston,  Mass. 
Rev.   Newniiin   Hall,    D.  D.,     Vine    House, 

Hanipstead,  London,  Eng. 
Mark    W.    Harrington,    Chief    of    Weather 

Bureau,  Washington,  D.  C. 
James  Jeffrey  Roche,  Editor  of  "  The  Pilot,'' 
Boston,  Mass.  :  — 
"  I  do  not  believe  that  even  an  advocate  of 
'  unrestricted    vivisection  '    should    be 
subjected  to  the  mercy  of    his  fellow 
vivisectors ;  but  therein,  perhaps,  I  err 
on  the  side  of  tenderness." 

Rev.  George  Hughes,  Editor  of  "  The  Chris- 
tian Standard,"    Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Rev.  James  O.  S.  Huntington,  Westminster, 
Maryland:  — 
"  There  seems  to  be  an  increasing  tendency 
on  the  part  of  people  at  large  to  act  as 
though  the  principal  reason  for  being  on 
this  planet  were  to  continue  to  exist  in 
the  life  of  this  world.   I  believe  that  the 
ver}'  opposite  is  true;  that  man  exists  in 
order  to  die,  and  through  death  to  find 
life." 
Rev.  John  A.  Bevington,  B.  D.,  Barnstable, 

Mass. 
Rev.  H.  D.  Lathrop,  A.  M.,  D.D.,  St.  Helena, 

California. 
Rev.  ,Jas.  H.  Denny,  V.  P.,  A.  H.  A..  Roch- 
ester, N.  Y.  . 
Rev.  John  T.  G.  Nichols,  S.T.  D.,  Cambridge, 
Mass. :  — 
"I    heartily    indorse     the   above     without 
change  or  qualification.     I  regard  vivi- 
section   as  one  of  the  most  monstrous 
wrongs  and  cruelties  of  our  times." 

Rev,  F.  R.  Farrand,  A.  B.,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

Rev.  Myron  W.  Reed,  Denver,  Colo. 

Rev.  Francis   J.    Clerc,  D.  D.,   Philipsburg, 

Penn. 
Rev.  J.    F.   Packard,    Author  and  Editor  of 

"^Messiah's  Herald,"  Walnut  Hill,  Mass. 
Rev.  W.  Simonton,  D.  D.,  Emmittsburg,  Md. 


Rev.  George  McClellan  Fiske,  D.  D.,  Provi- 
dence, R.  I. 

Rev.  Charles  D.  Bell,  D.  D.,  Cheltenham, 
England. 

Clara  B.  Colijy,  Editor,  Washington,  D.  C. 

P.  W.  Raidobough,  Editor,  Chicago,  111. 

J.  A.  Mitchell,  Editor,  New  York  City. 

C.  A.  Bickford,  Editor,  Boston,  Mass.' 

E.  C.  Townsend,  Editor,  New  York  City. 

Henry  B.  Williams,  Bristol,  Vt. 

Hon.  Rowland  B.  Mahany,  JM.  C,  Washing- 
ton, D.  C. 

Prof.  Geo.  L.  Collie,  Beloit  College,  Beloit, 
Wisconsin. 

Prof.  J.  L.  Patterson,  Union  College,  Schenec- 
tady, N.  Y. 

Hon.  Geo.  C.  Crowthers,  St.  Joseph,  Mo. 

Hon.  J.  E.  Jones,  G'^'^'ernor  of  Nevada. 

Hon.  J.  E.  Rickards,  Governor  of  Montana. 

Hon.  Mat  Hoke,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

John  T.  Dale,  Esq.,  Chicago,  111. 

A.  S.  Pratt,  Pres.  Washington  Humane  Soc, 

Washington,  D.  C. 
Hon.  Rufus  Dane,  Mobile,  Alabama. 
Henry    D.   Lloyd,    Editor    of  the    ''Chicago 

Tribune,"  Chicago,  111. 

B,  O.  Flower,  Editor  of  "  The  Arena,"  Boston, 

Mass. 
Mrs.  Robert  Treat  Paine,  Boston,  Mass. 
Mrs.  Grace  S.  Voorhees,  W.  Winsted,  Conn.: 
"After  having  had  an  extended  course  in 
college  in  vivisection  under  a  Christian 
professor." 
W.  J.  Brewster,  Hannibal,  N.  Y. 
Henry  S.  Salt,  Author,  London. 
"Ouida,"  Author,  Florence.  Italj'. 
Chas.  H.  Grandgent,  A.  B.,  Director  of  Modern 
Language  Instruction  in  the  Boston  Public 
Schools,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
Prof.  J.  Seymour  Slie,  A.]M.,Topeka,  Kansas. 
Willard  J.  Hull,  Esq.,  Minneapolis,  INIinn. 

D.  O'Loughlin,  Editor  of  the  "Twentieth 
Centurv,"  New  York  City. 

Hon.  W.  A.  Peffer,  U.  S.  Senator,  Kansas. 

Hon.  Dennis  M.  Hurley,  M.  C,  Brooklyn, 
New  York. 

Hon.  Jove  L.  Johnson,  M.  C,  Sacramento, 
California. 

Hon.  Jacob  H.  Gallinger,  M.  D.,  U.  S.  Sena- 
tor, N.  H. 

Hon.  Thomas  W.  Palmer,  Ex-Senator  from 
Michigan. 

Hon.  Th.  ]\IcEwan,  Jr.,  Member  of  Congress, 
New  Jersey. 

Hon.  Elijah  A.  Jlorse,  Member  of  Congress, 
Mass. 

Hon.  L.  M.  Strong,  M.  C,  Ohio. 


VIVISECTION    ALLOWABLE    IF   WITHOUT    PAIN. 


23 


Hon.  J.  D.  Leighty,  M.  C,  Ind. 
Byron  B.  Northrup,  Esq.,  Racine,  Wis. 
Charles  A.  Haniliu,  Esq.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Cliristoplier  Roberts,  Esq.,  Newark,  N.  J. 
R.  H.  Carotliers,  Associate  Editor  of    "The 

Southern  School,"  Louisville,  Ken. 
James  P.  Magenis,  Esq.,  Editor  of  the  "  Adams 

Freeman,"  Adams,  Mass. 
H.  L.  Green,Esq.,Editor  of  the  "FreeThought 
Magazine,"  Chicago,  111. 
"I  settle  this  question  in  my  own  mind  the 
same   way   that    Garrison    settled    the 
slavery  question :    '  As  I  knew  it  was 
wrong  to  sell  my  children  on  the  auction 
block,  I  decided  from  that  it  would  be 
wrong  to  sell  an}'  other  man's  children.' 
So  I  say,  '  I  would  allow  no  cruel  treat- 
ment on   any   living  creature    that    I 


would  not  permit  on  my  own  chil- 
dren.' " 

Prof.  James  Otis  Lincoln,  San  Mateo,  Cal. 

Prof.  W.  C.  Esty,  Amherst,  JIass. 

Prof.  B.  D.  Cockrill,  Pres.  Trinity  University, 
Tehuacana,  Texas. 

Mrs.  Olive  Thorne  Miller,  Bird  Student  and 
Author,  Brooklyn,  Mass. 

Miss  Louise  Imogen  Guiney,  Writer,  Auburn- 
dale,  Mass. 

Mrs.  Elizabeth  Stuait  Phelps  Ward,  Author, 
Newton  Centre,  Mass. 

Mr.  Herbert  D.  Ward,  Author. 

Warren  Lee  Goss,  Author,  Norwich,  Conn. 

Edward  Maitland,  Esq.,  Author,  London, 
England. 

C.  W.  Emerson,  Emerson  College  of  Oratory, 
Boston,  Mass. 


11.     VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE    IF    WITHOUT    PAIN. 


Whether  that  experimentation  upon  living  animals  known  as 
Vivisection  is  justifiable  or  not,  depends,  in  our  judgment,  exclusively 
on  the  (juestloii  of  pain.  Utility  alone  cannot  give  Science  lier 
authority;  for  then  might  she  ask,  -as  she  sometimes  has  already 
done,  for  the  living  bodies  of  the  criminal,  the  idiot,  or  the  savage, 
wherein  to  search  for  the  mysteries  of  life.  We  believe  that  Man's 
dominion  over  the  animated  world  beneath  him  is  not  absolute;  that 
the  power  to  kill  does  not  cover  the  right  to  torture;  that  our  power 
is  responsible;  that  our  Humanity  invests  us  with  certain  moral 
obligations  toward  the  lower  forms  of  life;  and  that  under  these 
Man  is  not  free  to  treat  even  the  scorpion  or  the  tiger  as  they  might 
treat  him.  But  the  use  of  chloroform  and  ether  have  made  it  pos- 
sible to  perform  certain  experiments  and  demonstrations  upon  liv- 
ing animals  without  the  slightest  pain,  and  these  only  we  regard  as 
justifiable  for  demonstration  or  research. 

The  dangers  of  this  practice,  however,  are  so  many,  the  tempta- 
tions to  excess  are  so  strong,  the  abuses  to  which  it  has  led  are  so 
notorious  and  deplorable,  that  the  decision  of  this  question  of  pain 
should  not  be  left  to  the  judgment  of  each  experimenter;  but  the 
whole  practice,  like  the  study  of  human  anatomy  with  dissection, 
should  be  regulated  by  definite  laws,  confined  to  certain  objects, 
permitted  only  to  competent  and  trustworthy  persons,  and  restricted 
to  licensed  places  which  shall  be  open  at  all  times  to  inspection  by 
the  Presidents  of  Humane  Societies  for  Protection  of  Animals  or 
their  authorized  representatives. 


24      .  VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE    IF   WITHOUT   PAIN. 

Albert  L.  Gihon,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Medical  Director,  U.  S.  Navy, 
in  charge  of  the  U.  S.  Naval  Hospital,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Prof.  Henry  M.  Field,  M.  D.,  Emeritus  Professor  of  Therapeutics, 
Dartmouth  Medical  College  :  • — 

"  I  give  the  above  my  emphatic  approval.  But  if  vivisection  thus  re- 
stricted and  guarded  is  not  attainable,  I  should  affix  my  signature  to  No.  I." 

Clinton  Wagner,  M.  D.,  Senior  Surgeon  of  the  Metropolitan 
Throat  Hospital,  New  York  City  :  — 

"  Vivisection  may  be  allowable  if  without  pain  and  performed  by  the 
Professor  or  his  licensed  assistants,  and  only  in  the  laboratories  of  incorpo- 
rated ?«edica/ schools." 

W.  C.  BouTON,  A.  B.,  M.  D.,  Clinical  Instructor  in  Neurology  at 
the  Northwestern  University  Medical  School,  Chicago,  111. :  — 

"  I  do  not  believe  that. vivisection  should  be  wholly  dispensed  with,  for  I 
believe  that  we  can  still  gain  some  valuable  knowledge  from  it.  But  I  believe, 
as  stated,  that  it  should  be  without  pain,  regulated  by  definite  laws,  confined 
to  certain  objects,  permitted  only  to  competent  and  trustworthy  persons,  and 
restricted  to  licensed  places  which  shall  be  open  at  all  times  to  ins])ection  by 
the  Presidents,  or  their  authorized  representatives,  of  Humane  Societies  for 
Protection  of  Animals." 

Prof.  H.  B.  Cummins,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  Lincoln, 
Nebraska. 

Prof.  Franklin  Townsend,'  A.  M,,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology, 
Albany  Medical  College,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  J.  C.  Hartzell,  Jr.,  M.S.,  Professor  of  Biology,  Claflin  Uni- 
versity, Orangeburg,  S.  C. 

Prof.  J.  H.  Etheridge,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Obstetrics  and 
Gynsecology,  Push  Medical  College,  Chicago,  111. 

Prof.  H.  D.  Champlin,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Nervous  Diseases,  Cleve- 
land University  of  Medicine  and  Surgery,  Cleveland,  Ohio  :  — 

"  I  do  not  believe  in  these  cases  any  tyro  should  be  allowed  to  vivisect  ; 
nor  do  I  believe  in  vivisection  just  to  verify  old  experiments.  Unless 
something  of  great  value  is  to  be  gained  in  a  scientific  way,  it  should  be  for- 
bidden even  under  the  influence  of  an  anaesthetic." 

Prof.  W.  T.  Wenzell,  M.  D.,  Ph.  D.,  Professor  of  Chemistry,  etc., 
University  of  California,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

Eev.  Frederic  E.  Marvin,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  I  believe  vivisection  should  be  allowable  in  cases  where  pain  may  be 
avoided,  and  then  only  as  conducted  by  experts  for  some  definite  end  of 
sufficient  consequence.  It  should  never  be  allowed  for  mere  purposes  of 
demonstration,  or  as  a  method  of  instruction  in  the  class-room  or  in  the  medi- 
cal college." 

(In  another  letter  to  the  Association,  Dr.  Marvin  says  :  "  Though  now  a 
minister  of  the  Gospel,  I  was  educated  to  the  profession  of  medicine  and  was 


VIVISECTIOX   ALLOWABLE   IF   WITHOUT    PAIN.  .  25 

graduated  from  the  College  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons,  '  Medical  Depart- 
ment of  Columbia  College,  N.  Y.,'  in  1870.  In  the  class-room  I  saw  vivisec- 
tions so  unqualifiedly  cruel  that  even  now  they  remain  in  my  memory  as  a 
niofhtmare.  I  am  persuaded  that  none  of  the  so-called  experiments  upon 
living  animals  that  I  witnessed  were  of  any  real  value  to  me  or  to  my  fellow- 
students.") 

A.  K  Brockway,  a.  M.,  M.  D.,  New  York  City :  — 

"  My  opinion  is  that  no  experimenter  should  inflict  pain  on  any  animal 
jvhich  he  loould  not  himself  he  willing  to  suffer  in  the  same  cause.^' 

William  Wallace  Gardnek,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. :  — 

"  I  believe  it  useful  under  proper  restrictions  to  save  human  suffering. 
What  I  should  he  willing  to  suffer  voluntarily,  the  lotoer  order  of  animals  should 
be  ohliged  to  suffer  for  humanity's  sake." 

W.  S.  Tremaine,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  Personally,  I  would  rather  perform  vivisection  on  human  beings  than 
on  the  lower  animals,  for  the  reason  that  the  object  can  be  made  intelligent 
to  them ;  and,  again,  there  is  some  value  to  the  world  both  morally  and  physi- 
cally. Many  of  the  so-called  '  advances  '  in  surgery  are  of  little  or  no 
value,  except  as  advertising  dodges  for  ambitious  young  surgeons." 

Henry  W.  Sawtelle,  M.  D.,  Surgeon  in  the  U.  S.  Marine  Hos- 
pital, New  Orleans,  La. 

Albert  H.  Blanchard,  M.  D.  (Harvard),  Sherborn,  Mass.:  — 

"It  appears  to  me  that  the  advantages  of  vivisection,  and  the  joractical 
good  derived  therefrom,  are  not,  at  present  at  least,  sufficient  to  justify  its 
practice  unless  it  can  be  done  without  pain." 

C.  J.    Cleborne,   M.  D.,    Medical  Director,  U.  S.   ISTavy,  Naval 
Hospital,  Norfolk,  Va. 

Prof.  J.   Henry  Jackson,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology, 
Barre,  Vermont. 

Frank  W.  Ring,  M.  D,,  A.M.,  Surgeon  to  Manhattan  Eye  and 
Ear  Hospital,  New  York  City. 

N.  A.  MossMAN,  M.  D.,  New  York  City :  — 

"  Without  supervision,  indifferent  experimenters  might  say  that  they  had 
complied  with  all  the  requirements  if  they  gave  a  few  inhalations  of  chloro- 
form, then  experimented  any  length  of  time  without  continuing  its  use." 

John  Wesley  Daily,  A.  B.,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. :  — 

"Man,  by  reason  of  superior  intelligence,  does  not  own  the  earth.  He 
is  simply  one  of  the  creatures  growing  out  of  the  conditions  that  give  and 
govern  life  throughout  the  limitless  universe  of  Nature,  and  in  all  the  count- 
less worlds.  Who  knows  or  can  even  guess  the  ultimate  unfoldments  of 
time  ?  In  the  mind  of  the  crowning  intelligence  that  may  finally  dominate 
this  earth,  man  may  appear  as  the  man-monkey  of  the  Miocene  epoch  or  the 


26 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE   IF   WITHOUT   PAIN. 


anthropoid  ape  of  the  present.  Until  it  is  shown  that  vivisection  actually 
benefits  the  animals,  as  a  class,  upon  which  it  is  practised,  man's  right  to 
use  his  scalpel  upon  live,  quivering  animal  structures  is  very  questionable." 

Edward  W.  Aveky,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  E".  Y. :  — 

"  Even  though  anaesthetics  are  used,  I  do  not  consider  vivisection  justifi- 
able to  demonstrate  well-known  facts  or  to  gratify  cnriosity." 

Edgar  S.  Dodge,  M.  D.,  Natick,  Mass.  :  — 

"  Vivisection  should  be  under  the  limitation  and  control  of  United  States 
law,  and  severe  penalties  should  be  applied  to  all  violations." 

Clarkson  C  Schuyler,  M.  D.,  Plattsburg,  N.  Y. :  — 

"If  a  law  allowing  vivisection  and  without  pain  cannot  be  enforced,  then 
I  am  for  the  absolute  prohibition  of  vivisection." 


W.  E.  Sparrow,  M.  D.,  Mattapoisett,  Mass. 
H.  H.  Brighaiii,  M.  D.,  I-'itchburg,  Mass. 
James  Utley,  M.  D.,  Newton,  Mass. 
E.  A.  Chase,  M.  D.,  Brockton,  Mass. 
P.  H.  Keefe,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
M.  L.  Lindsay,  M.  D.,  Athol,  Mass. 

E.  A.  Deane,  M.  D.,  Montague,  IMass. 
Geo.  E.  Foster,  M.  D.,  Springfield.  Mass. 
John  B.  Chagnon,  M.  D.,  Fall  River,  Mass. 
C.  B.  Bridgham,  M.  D.,  Cohasset,  Mass. 
John  Blackmer,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 

(Makes  slight  changes  in  phraseology,  but 
not  to  impair  the  general  principle.) 
Henry  J.  Gushing,  M.  D.,  Merrimac,  Mass. 
Luther  M.  Lee,  M.  D.,  Dorchester,  Mass. 
S.  J.  Grover,  M.  D.,  Brockton,  Mass. 
N.  R.  Perkins,  M.  D.,  Dorchester,  Mass. 
Wm.  0.  Hunt,  M.  D.,  Newtonville,  Mass. 
George  W.  Doane,  M.  D.,  Hyannis,  Mass. 
M.  S.  Soule,  JL  D.,  Winthrop,  Mass. 
S.  W.  Clark,  M.  D.,  Lynn,  Mass. 

F.  A.  Shurtleff,  M.  D.,  Somerset,  Mass. 
Charles  W.  Stiles,  jM.  D.,  Newburyport,  Mass. 
J.  E.  Blaisdell,  M.  D.,  A.  M.,  Chelsea,  Mass. 
Francis  Coliamore,  M.  D.,  North  Pembroke. 
W.  G.  Eaton,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  IMass. 

C.  R.  Starkweather,  M.  D.,  West  Cumming- 
ton,  Mass. 

S.  T.  Davis.  IM.  D.,  Orleans,  Mass. 

J.  R.  Greenleaf,  M.  D.,  Gardner,  Mass. 

Wm.  T.  Souther,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. : 
"  During  my  course  at  Harvard  (in  187.3), 
experiments  upon  animals  were  per- 
formed painlessly ;  ether  was  used 
invariabh",  even  upon  frogs  and 
tadpoles." 

L.  W.  Curtis,  M.  D.,  Globe  Village,  Mass. 

P.  L.  Sanborn,  M.  D..  MarWehead,  Mass. 

Edgar  C.  Collins,  M.  D.,  Springfield.  Mass. 


Daniel  March,  Jr.,  M.  D.,  Winchester,  Mass. 

T.  F.  Goodwin,  M.  D.,  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y. 

J.  E.  Hamill,  M.  D.,  Phoenix,  N.  Y. 

D.  D.  Wickham,  M.  D.,  Port  Jervis,  N.  Y. 

S.  W.  Reed,  M.  D.,  Morgantown,  N.  Y. 

George  N.  Wilson,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Charles  M.  Fuller,  M.  D.,  Boston,  j\rass, 

Edwin  H.  Bi'igliam,  M.  D..  Boston,  Mass. 

Isaac  Farrar,  M.  D.,  Boston,  IMass. 

J.  Foster  Bush,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

A.  W.  K.  Newton,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

James  Louis  Beyea,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Egbert  H.  Grandin,  M.  D.,  New  York  City : 
"Vivisection  is  allowable  if  without  pain, 
except  when,  in  the  judgment  of  recog- 
nized experts,  new  facts  of  value  to  the 
human  race  cannot  be  certified  if  the 
animal  be  anaesthetized." 

W.  H.  Vermilye,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Dayton  W.  Searle,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  New  York 
City. 

G.  S.  Cook,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

John  Pitkin,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Alcinous  B.  Jamison,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

John  I.  Brinkerhoff,  M.  D.,  Auburn,  N.  Y.  " 

Alexander  Berghaus,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Richard  E.  Kunze,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Frederic  J.  Kneuper,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

John  G.  Linsley,  M.  D.,  New  York  City  :  — 
"  I  accept  No.  III.  in  regard  to  use  of 
drugs,  and  No.  II.  in  regard  to  vivi- 
section per  se.  Nos.  II.  and  III.  com- 
bined will  express  my  views  upon  the 
subject." 

James   G.   Birch,   M.  D.    (Harvard   Medical 
School),  Newburgh,  N.  Y. 

Edward  G-  Tripp,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Geo!  W.  Brush,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

A.  Henry  Hart,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE   IF   WITHOUT    PAIX. 


27 


William  O'Meagher,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
M.  K.  Yedder,  M.  D.  College   Physician  & 
Surgeon,  New  York  Cit}'. 
(Dr.  Vedder  underscores  last  three  lines.) 
A.   D.  Rockwell,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  New  York 
City:  — 
"Vivisection  is  allowable  if  without   pain 
and  restricted  by  utility." 
Edward  F.  Quinlan,  M.  D.,  New  York  City: 
'•I    am    radically   opposed    to    vivisection 
without  any  restrictions,  as  also  am  I 
opposed  to  the  absolute  prohibition  of 
vivisection.    .  .  .  Vivisection  allowable 
without  pain  meets  with  my  hearty  in- 
dorsement." 
Martin  Burke,  M.  D.  (Bellevue),  New  York 
City:  — 
"This  is  a  very  proper  statement." 
Charles    Carter   Cranmer,   M.    D.,    Surgeon, 

New  York  City. 
A.  D.  Tewksbury,  JI.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 
M.  A.  Southworth,  M.  D.,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y. 
W.  F.  Sanford,  M.  D.,  Webster,  ]Mass. 
E.  F.  Spaulding,  M.  D.,  Boston. 
Geo.  J.  Moser,  ]\I.  D.,  New  York  City:  — 
"  The  animal  experimented  on  should  not 
come  out  of  the  influence  of  anaesthetics 
after  an  important  fact  has  been  demon- 
strated, or  a  major  operation  has  been 
performed." 

D.  N.  Barker,  M.  D.,  Broadalbin,  Fulton  Co., 

N.  Y.:  — 
"I  indorse  as  above  if  regulated  by  definite 

State  laws,  permitted  only  to  competent 

persons,"  etc. 
J.  P.  Wheeler,  M.  D.,  Brighton,  N.  Y. 
O.  A.  .Jakway,  M.  D.,  Brockport,  N.  Y. 
A.  B.  Sloan,  M.  D.,  Belloner,  N.  Y. 
M.  Talbot,  M.  D.,  Niagara  Falls,  N.  Y. 
J.  H.  Westcott,  M.  D  ,  Norwich,  N.  Y. 
J.  C.  Benham,  M.  D.,  Hudson,  N.  Y. 
H.  P.  Vosburgh,  M.  D..  Halsey  Valley,  N.  Y. 
John  H.  Fitch,  M.  D.,  New  Scotland,  N.  Y. 
.^.  O.  Gleason,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 
John  H.  Mitchell,  M.  D.,  Newburgh,  N.  Y. 
H.  C.  Johnston,  "SI.  D.,  New  Brighton,  N.  Y. 
J.  H.  Copp,  M.  D.,  Natural  Bridge,  N.  Y. 

E.  H.  Barnes,  M.  D.,  Marathon,  N.  Y. 
Walter  E.  Lauderdale,  M.  D.,  Geneseo,  N.  Y. 
E.  U.  Coonley,  M.  D.,  Port  Richmond,  N.  Y. 
Jas.  C.  Spiegel,  M.  D.,  Middletown,  N.  Y. 
C.  B.  Warner,  M.  D.,  Port  Henry,  N.  Y. 

H.  C.  Miller,  M.  D.,  Greenbush,"N.  Y. :  — 
"  In  my  opinion  vivisection  should  be  per- 
formed    on    criminals    condemned    to 
death." 


Samuel  W.  Abbott,  M.  D.,  Wakefield,  Mass.: 
"Vivisection  is  allowable,    if  without   un- 
necessary or  excessive  pain." 

John  E.  Losee,  M.  D.,  Red  Hook,  N.  Y. 

R.C.VanWyck,M.D.,  Hopewell  Junction.N.Y. 

E.  M.  Draper,  M.  D.,  Ilion,  N.  Y. 

O.  A.  Bruce,  JL  D.,   Hyudsville,  N.  Y. 

Alonson  Bishop,  M.  D.,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

C.  Spencer  Kinney,  M.  D.,  Middletown,  N.  Y. 

Lucien  L.  Brainard,  M.  D.,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y. 

Wm.  M.  James,  M.  D.,  Whitesboro,  N.  Y. 

Otto  Risch,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

David  A.  Gordon,  M.  D.  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

John  C.  MacEvitt,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

O.  C.  Stout,  M.  D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Frank  H.  Green,  M.  D.,  Homer,  N.  Y. 

J.  Russell  Taber,  M,  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Z.  Brooks  Wales,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

Theron  A.  Wales,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

A.  M.  Larkin,  M.  D.,  Norwood,  N.  Y. 

John  W.  Benton,  M.  D.,  Ogdensburg,  N.  Y. 

John  M.  Julian,  M.  D.,  Pleasant  Valley,  N.  Y. 

Lyman  Barton,  M.  D.,  A.M.,  Willsboro,N.y. 

Cassius  J.  Logans,  M.D.,  Warrensburgh,N.Y. 

T.  James  Owens,  M.  D.,  Steuben,  N.  Y. 

G.  H.  Lathrop,  M.D.,  Livingston  Manor,  N.  Y. 

T.  J.  Green,  M.  D.,  Mexico,  N.  Y. 

J.  H.  Helmer,  M.  D.,  Lockport,  N.  Y. 

J.  H.  Trumbull,  M.  D.,  Hornellsville,  N.  Y. 

Ira  D.  Hopkins,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

William  L.  Harding,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Lyman  A.  Clark,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  N.  Y. 

J.  R.  Brown,  M.  D.,  Seward,  N.  Y. 

Nelson  W.  Bates,  M.D.,  Central  Square,  N.Y. 

A.  Von  Der  Luhe,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Edward  B.  Foote,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Lyman  Watkins,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

H.  C.  Sutton,  M.  D.,Rome,  N.V. 

L.  M.  Johnson,  M.  D.,  Greene,  N.  Y. :  — 
"Except  in  some  very  rare  cases,  when  the 
use  of  chloroform  or  ether  is  inadmissi- 
ble, or  rather  utterly  impossible,  with  a 
due  regard  to  necessary  scientific  ex- 
perimentation." 

Henry  B.  Burton,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. 

George  M.  Lamb,  M.  D.,  Hoosick  Falls,  N.  Y. 

Samuel  Blume,  M.  D.,  Riverhead,  L.  I.,  N.  Y. 

Elliott  C.  Howe,  M.  D.,  Lansingburgh,  N.  Y. 

Henry  W.  Caldwell,  M.  D.,  Pulaski,  N.Y.  : 

"  I  fully  concur  with  and  indorse  the  abovi 

as  the  only  right  we  have  for  official 

demonstrations  upon  the  living." 

Jos.  Alfred  Deane,  M.  D..  Catskill,  N.  Y. 
A.  J.  Alleman,  M.  D.,  MacDougall,  N.  Y. 
Benj.  C.  Wakely,  M.  D.,  Hornellsville,  N.  Y. 
J.  Denniston,  M.  D.,  Ovid,  N.  Y. 


28 


VIVISECTION    ALLOWABLE   IF   WITHOUT   PAIN. 


Keuben  S.Myers,  M.D.,  Clarence  Center,  N.Y. 

S.  W.  Wetmore,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Mary  B.  Wetmore,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Jerome  Angel,  M.  D.,  Cortland,  N.  Y. 

R.  E.  Belding,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. 

Mary  E.  Bond,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

H.  L.  Chase,  M.  D.,  Palmyra,  N.  Y. 

C.  S.  Boyce,  M.  D.,  Salamanca,  N.  Y. 

Henr}--  A;  Jewett,  M.  D.,  Northborough,  Mass. 

Wm.  Hagadorn,  M.  D.,  Gilboa,  N.  Y. 

Acbilles  Rose,  M.  D.,  New  York  Citj'. 

A.  P.  Parries,  M.  D.,  Florida,  N.  Y. 

C.  O.  Johnson,  M.  D.,  Gowanda,  N.  Y. 

F.  W.  Advance,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

J.  A.  Westlake,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

Silas  Pinckney  Holbrook,  M.  D.,  East  Doug- 
lass, Mass. 

David  F.  Atwater,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 

Edward  H.  Ellis,  M.  D.,  Marlboro,  Mass. 

Hiram  B.  Cross,  M.  D.,  Jamaica  Plain,  Mass. 

H.  A.  Fiske,  M.  D.,  East  Longmeadow, 
Mass. 

M.  Bonner  Flinn,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 


H.  Warren  White,  M.  D.,  Roxbury,  Mass. 
(Physician  to  the  St.  Elizabeth  and  Bap- 
tist Hospitals). 

Charles  P.  Morrill,  M.  D.,  North  Andover 
Depot,  Mass. 

F.  W.  Wliittemore,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

Francis  L.  Babcock,  M.  D  ,  Dedham,  Mass. 

Edward  P.  Scales,  M.  D.,  Newton,  Mass. 

Charles  L.  French,  M.  D.,  Clinton,  Mass. 

E.  D.  Hutchinson,  -M.  D.,  Westfield,  Mass. 

James  R.  Deane,  M.  D.,  Newton  Higliland.-, 
Mass. 

Alvin  M.  Cashing,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 

E.  W.  Higher,  M.  D.,  Northampton,  Mass. 

Asa  V.  Snow,  M.  D.,  Brookfield,  Mass. 

Albert  B.  Robinson,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

J.  F.  Shuitleff,  M.  D.,  South  Middleborough, 
Mass. 

John  Langdon  Sullivan,  M.  D.,  Maiden,  Mass. 

E.  P.  Hussey,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Clayton  L.  Hill,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

J.  S.  Helbert,  M.  I).,  Buffalo,  N.  Y, 

H.  A.  Morse,  M.  D.,  Batavia,  N.  Y. 


Mr.  William  Dean  Howells,  Author,  New  York  City. 

Mr.  Edward  Bellamy,  Author,  Chicopee  Falls,  Mass. 

Mr.  Brander  Matthews,  Author,  New  York  City. 

Prof.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart,  Harvard  College,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

Prof.  John  Bascom,  Williamstown,  Mass. 

Prof.  AtBioN  W.  Small,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Sociology,  Univer- 
sity of  Chicago. 

Prof.  John  Grier  Hibben,  Professor  of  Logic,  Princeton  Univer- 
sity, Princeton,  N.  J. 

Prof.  Charles  W,  Shields,  Princeton,  N.  J. :  — 

"  Vivisection  is  allowable  if  without  pain,  in  the  judgment  of  humane  and 
scientific  experts." 

Prof.  W.  F.  Hewett,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Prof.   Galusha   Anderson,   D.  D.,  LL.D.,  Professor   of   Practical 
Theology,  University  of  Chicago. 

Prof.  H.  S.  White,  Dean  of  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. : 

"  Vivisection  is  allowable  if  for  true  scientific  purposes,  in  order  ultimately 
to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  mankind,  as  well  as  of  animal  life  in  general." 

Prof.  S.  Burnham,  Dean  of  the  Hamilton  Theological  Seminary, 
Hamilton,  Madison  Co.,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  Henry  K.  Edson,  Grinnell,  Iowa. 

Prof.  W.  G.  TousEY,  A.  M.,  B.  D.,  Tufts  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  M.  L.  D'OoGE,  University  of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor,  Mich. 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE    IF    WITHOUT    PAIN.  29 

• 
Prof.  Gabriel  Campbell,   M.  P.,    S.  T.  D.,  Dartmouth  College, 
Hauover,  N.  H. 

Prof.  George  E.  Woodberry,  Columbia  College,  ISTew  York  City. 
(Erases  all  but  last  paragraph,  and  inserts  "  Public  Officers  "  in  last  line 
but  one.) 

Prof.  James  H.  Hyslop,  Columbia  College,  New  York  City. 
Prof.  Charles  C.  Rounds,  Ph.D.,  Principal  of  the  State  Normal 
School,  Plymouth,  IST.  H.  :  — 

"  Vivisection  is  allowable  if  without  pain,  for  research,  —  not  for  illustra- 
tion and  demonstration." 

President  E.  Benjamin  Andrews,  D.  D.,  LL.D.,  Brown  Univer- 
sity, Providence,  P.  I.  :  — 

"  I  would  add  that,  if  there  are  results  of  very  great  importance  obtain- 
able by  vivisection  without  anagsthesia  or  with  limited  anaesthesia,  I  would 
permit  vivisection  without  or  with  limited  anaesthesia  subject  to  the  condi- 
tions recited  above  in  the  last  ^^aragraph  of  printed  matter." 

President  Andrew  V.  Raymond,  LL.D.,  Union  College,  Sche- 
nectady, X.  Y. 

President  James  R.  Day,  D.  D.,  S.  T.  D,,  Chancellor  of  the  Syra- 
cuse University,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

President  George  A.  Gates,  D.  D.,  Iowa  College,  Grinnell,  Iowa: 
"  This,  on  the  whole,  seems  nearest  my  own  view.  There  are  perhaps 
some  cases  where  pain  may  be  an  essential  factor  of  the  investigation.  This 
ought  to  be  of  the  shortest  possible  duration  consistently  with  the  scientific 
purpose.  More  depends  at  last  upon  the  right  kind  of  heart  in  the  bosom  of 
the  operator." 

President  Chas.  F.  Meserol,  A.  M'.,  Shaw  University,  Raleigh,  JST.  C. 

President  M.  Wahlstrom,  A.M.,  Ph.D.,  Gustavus  Adolphus  Col- 
lege, St.  Peter,  Minn. 

President  Carl  A.  Swensson,  Bethany  College,  Lindsborg, 
Kansas  ;  — 

"  Vivisection  is  allowable  if  without  pain,  and  for  object  stated  in 
No.  II L" 

President  Fenton  Gall,  Hillsboro  College,  Hillsboro,  Ohio. 
President  Wm.  H.  Purxell,  A.  M.,  LL.D.,  New  Windsor  College, 
New  Windsor,  ^laryland  :  — 

"  The  fourth  statement  is  horrible  ;  the  third  may  be  tolerated ;  the 
second  expresses  my  opinion." 


Mr.  Robert  S.  Davis,  F.litor  of  "  The  Call," 

Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Mrs.    Frank    Leslie,    Author   and  Publisher, 

New  York  City. 
Prof.  James  Swan  Barrell,  A.  M.,  Master  of 

Harvard  School,  Cambridgeport,  Mass. 


Dr.  H.  Lansing,  Editor,  New  York  City:  — 
"Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain,  and 
restricted  by  utility." 
Mr.  Henry  B.  Blackwell,  Editor  of  "  Woman's 
Journal,"  Boston,  Mass. 


30 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE    IF   WITHOUT    PAIN". 


Et.  Rev.  John  James  Stewart,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  Worcester- 
shire, England  :  — 

"I  think  II.  and  III.  may  be  combined.  Vivisection  I  think  is  allowable 
when  restricted  by  utility,  and  when  it  is  performed  without  pain  to  the 
animal  operated  upon." 

Rt,  Eev.  Thomas  A.  Jagger,  Bishop  of  Southern  Ohio. 
Et.  Eev.  George  F.  Seymour,  Bishop  of  Springfield,  111. 
Et.  Eev.  Daniel  S.  Tuttle,  Bishop  of  Missouri,  St.  Louis,  Mo-. 
Et.  Eev.  C.K.  Nelson,  Bishop  of  Georgia,  Atlanta,  Ga. 
Et.  Eev.  0.  W.  Whitaker,  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania. 
Et.  Eev.  Francis  K.  Brooks,  Bishop  of   Oklahoma  and  Indian 
Territories,  Guthrie,  Oklahoma. 

Eev.  C.  W.  Leffingwell,  A.M.,  D.  D.,  Editor  of  ''The  Living 
Church,"  Chicago,  111. :  — 

"  To  be  allowed  only  for  instruction  of  students  in  medicine  and  surgery." 
Eev.  George   J.  Magill,  D.  D.,  Newport,  E.  I. :  —  • 

"The  experiments  should  be  such  as  to  inflict  no  pain  during  tlie  opera- 
tion and  to  leave  the  subject  in  a  painless  condition  afterwards." 

Eev.  William  P.  Shrom,  D.  D.,  Pittsburg,  Pa. :  — 

"I  should  much  prefer  to  sign  No.  I.,  but  am  not  quite  sure  but  it 
would  hinder  to  some  extent  the  furthering  of  scientific  investigation.  My 
•whole  heart  is  on  that  side  of  the  question,  and  my  head  more  than  half  there 
too ;  yet  for  the  present  I  give  tlie  investigator  the  benefit  of  my  doubt." 

Eev.  Herman  C.  Eiggs,  D.  D.,  Eochester,  N.  Y. :  — 

"No.  II.  comes  nearest  of  your  four  forms  to  being  my  answer.  But  I 
favor  this  limited  permission  only  with  the  condition  that  experinientation 
shall  be  conducted  by  none  but  expert  investigators,  and  by  them  only  for 
neic  or  unsettled  experiments.  A  result  once  definitely  and  clearly  reached 
by  authoritative  investigation,  vivisection  with  reference  to  that  should  im- 
mediately cease  to  be  permissible." 

Eev.  Egbert  Aikman,  D.  D.,  Madison,  N.  J. ;  — 

"  It  seems  to  me  that  the  above  statement  meets  the  demands  of  an  en- 
lightened and  humane  public  opinion.  The  pain  of  instantaneously  inflicted 
death  is  not  greater  than  the  ordinary  pains  of  natural  death,  and  death 
under  the  influence  of  chloroform  is  without  pain.  There  seem  to  have  been 
discoveries  made  of  the  causation  of  disease  and  of  remedial  agencies  in  the 
relief  and  cure  of  diseases  which  make  painless  vivisection  allowable  ;  and 
especially  if  the  places  where  it  is  performed  are  open  to  inspection  as 
above." 


Rev.  John  Hall,  D.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Rev.  Charles  H.  Eaton.  D.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Rev.  Reuen  Thomas.  D  D.,  Brookline,  Mass. 
Rev.  H.   Martyn   Hart,  D.  D.  (Dean  of  St. 
John's  Cathedral),  Denver,  Colo. 


Rev.  Granville  "W.  Nims,  Walton,  N.  Y. 
Rev.   Joseph  Anderson,   D.  D.,  Waterbury, 

Conn. 
Rev,  William  MacConnock.  M.  A.,  St.  Ann's 

Church,  Brooklyn,  N.  t. 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE    IF   WITHOUT   PAIX. 


31 


Rev.  Joseph  Henry  Allen,  D.  D.,  Cambridge, 
Mass. :  — 
"  The  whole  thing  is  so  repulsive  and  ab- 
horrent to  me  that  I  cannot   imagine 
instances  in  which  my  personal  conduct 
would  not  be  controlled  by  your  first 
condition     of    'absolute    prohibition.' 
But  something  must  be  conceded  by  a 
layman   to  experts;    and   I  think   the 
conditions  expressed  above  (No.  II.)  is 
■     all  that  can   be   attempted   wisely   by 
general  law.    And  I  do  not  feel  justified 
in  saying  that  a  scrupulously  medical 
specialist  in  an  extreme  case  may  not 
conform  with  No.  III.;  not,  however, 
the  ordinary  lecturer  or  practitioner." 
Rev..  Henry  E.  Niles,  D.  D.,  Yorl<,  Pa. 
Rev.  W.  C.  Gannett,  Rochester,  N.  Y.  :  — 
"Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain,  but 
only  for  purposes  of  investigation  (never 
of  illustration),  and  only  to  persons  duly 
licensed  under  stringent  conditions  of 
competency,  place,   time,    and    inspec- 
tion ;  all  other  vivisections  to  be  a  mis- 
demeanor punishable  by  imprisonment 
(not  fine)." 
Mrs.  Isabel  C.  Barrows,  M.  D.,  Editor,  Boston, 

Mass. 
Rev.    Samuel    J.    Barrows,    Editor    of    the 

"  Christian  Register,"  Boston,  Mass. 
Rev.  A.  J.  Lyman,  D.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Wm.  a'.  Vibbert,  S.  T.    D.,   New  Y'ork 
City :  — 
"  Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain  and 
restricted  by  utility." 
Rev.  W.  W.  Moorhead,  D.D.,  Greensburg,  Pa. 
Rev.  El  ward  C.  Hood,  Wrentham,  Mass. 
Rev.  Charles  H.  Oliphant,  Methuen,  Mass. 
Rev.  W.  M.  Backus,  Alton,  111.  :  — 

"I  am  not  well  enough  versed  upon  this 
subject  to  express   an   opinion  intelli- 
gently, but  the  above  9een\s  to  me  to  be 
the  rational  and  humane  conclusion." 
Rev.  J.  W.  Bailey,  Lockport,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Thomas  P.  Byrnes,  Humboldt,  Iowa. 
Rev.  S.  A.  Hoyt,  D.  D.,  Watertown,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Gen.  W.  Wood,  Mt.  Morris,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  JIary  H.  Graves,  Boston,  ^fass. 
Rev.  John  H.  Munro,  D.  D.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Rev.  W.  S.  Fulton,  D.  D.,  Lexington,  Ky. 
'  Rev,  A.  B.  Carver,  Yonkers,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Geo.  H.  Ide,  Milwaukee,  Wis. 
R«v.  Alvin  F.  Bailey,  Barre,  Mass.  :  — 
"  Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain,  and 
restricted  by  utility." 
Rev.  Theodore  S.-Rumnev,  Germantown,  Pa. 


Rev.  John  Townsend,  M.A.,  Middletown,  Ct. 

Rev.  Richmond  Shreve,  D.  D.,  Albany,  N.Y.: 
"  Vivisectiony«s/i^erf  by  utility  and  pain- 
lessness ;  to  be  restricted  by  law  to 
certain  definite  objects,  and  surrounded 
by  every  possible  safeguard  against 
license  or  abuse." 

Rev.  D.  0.  Mears,  Cleveland,  Oiiio. 

Rev.  Lemuel  B.  Bissell,  Monroe,  Jlich. 

Rev.  J.  A.  Rondthaler,  Indianapolis,  Ind. : 
"  If  the  first  paragraph  under  'Absolute 
Prohibition  of  Vivisection '  could  be 
proved  to  be  absolutely  true,  I  would 
sign  that  number.  However,  there  are 
as  many  high  in  knowledge  and  author- 
ity tiiat  express  opposite  views  to  those 
cited  there  that  I  sign  number  II.  in  the 
eainest  hope  that  its  provisions  may 
obtain." 

Rev.  Edward  H.  Krans,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  John  T.  Huntington,  Hartford,  Conn. 

Rev.  John  N.  Lewis,  Jr.,  B.  A.,  Honesdale,  Pa. 

Rev.  Wm.  C.  Richardson,  Newburyport,  Mass. 

Rev.  Wm.  P.  Orrick,  D.  D.,  Reading,  Pa. 

Rev.  Henry  M.  Ladd,  D.  D.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Rev.  J.  Sanders  Reed,  Watertown,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Charles  James  Wood,  S.  T.  B.,  York,  Pa. 

Rev.  Marcus  A.  Tolman,  Mauch  Chunk,  Pa. 

Rev.  J.  Frederick  Sexton,  M.  A.,  Cheshire,  Ct. 

Rev.  Dr.  Henry  McCrea,  New  Haven,  Conn. : 
"In  absence  of  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
facts,  I  endorse  the  1st  or  ■2d  proposi- 
tions in  your  circular,  strongly  inclining 
to  the  1st." 

Rev.  Frederick  B.  Allen,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  James  H.  ]McIlvaine,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  H-  W.  Nelson,  Jr.,  D.  D.,  Geneva,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  C.  S.  Brooks,  Fitchburg,  Mass. 

Rev.  A.  Z.  Conrad,  Worcester,  Mass. 

Rev.  George  H.  Reed,  Haverhill,  Mass. 

Rev.  Charles  E.  Jefferson,  B.  A.,  S.  T.  B., 
Chelsea,  Mass. 

Rev.  Louis  Gregory,  Lincoln,  Neb. 

Rev.  Smith  Baker,  D.  D.,  East  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  S.  S.  Mitchell,  Buffalo,  N.  Y.  :  — 

"Am  in  doubt  between  this  and  absolute 
prohibition." 

Rev.  A.  W.  Ringland,  D.  D.,  Toledo,  Ohio. 
Rev.  C.  H.  Tyndall,  M.  A.,  New  York  City. 
Rev.  James  Henry  Wiggin,  Boston,  Mass. 
Rev.  Thomas  M.  Miles,  Bristol,  Conn. 
Rev.  Dr.  Geo.  K.  Ward,  Dansville,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  James  Dingwell.  Rockville,  Conn. 
Rev.  Nelson  Millard,  D.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Alexander  McKenzie,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
Rev.  J.  Nelson  Trask,  New  Salem,  Mass. 


32 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE    IF    WITHOUT   PAIN, 


Kev.  Charles  01mstead,Cambridgeport,  Mass.: 
"  Should  prefer  these  points  softened  a  little 
for  cases  of  rare  eraerge7icy/' 

Kev.  T.  S.  Hamlin,  Washington,  D.  C.  :  — 
"I  do  not  accept  this  statement  unquali- 
fiedi}-.  Pain  in  animals  may  be  jus- 
tifiable if  certain  to  give  knowledge 
that  will  relieve  human  pain.  I  would, 
therefore,  partially  approve  HI.  But  the 
peril  is  that  science  will  disregard  pain 
in  its  zeal  of  discoveiy.  I  favor  very 
rigid  laws  of  restriction,  and  every  effort 
to  create  a  humane  public  sentiment." 

Rev.  Wm.  G.  Poor,  B.  A.,B.  D.,  Keene,N.  H.: 

"  Possibly  I  would  sign  the  first  on  a  careful 

examination  of  the  merits  of  the  case." 

Rev.  Wm.  H.  Hudnut,  Port  Jervis,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Daniel  R.  Foster,  A.  M.,  Trenton,  N.  J. : 
,  "  I  am  exceedingly  grateful  for  the  privilege 
of  contributing  in  the  very  slightest 
towards  restricting  this  evil.  Praj'  do 
not  become  discouraged.  It  is  deeply 
rooted,  and  has  concealed  environ- 
ments." 

Rev.  Charles  Martin  Niles,  Rutland,  Vt. 

Rev.  Wm.  V.  W.  Davis,  Pittsfield,  Mass. 

Rev.  G.  S.  Richardson,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Heber  H.  Beadle,  Bridgeton,  N.  J. 

Rev.  0.  W.  Folsom,  Bath,  Me. 

Rev.  Dan.  F.  Bradley,  Grand  Rapids,  Mich. 

Rev.  Chas.  H.  Bixby,  Cliicago,  111. 

Rev.  Herbert  G.  Coddiiigton,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  J.  M.  McGrath,  Morgan  Park,  111. 

Rev.  C.  H.  Hibbard,  D.  D.,  Burlington,  N.J. 

Rev.  Edwin  S.  Gould,  Athol  Centre. 

Rev.  Wm.  Heakes,  Wellsbnro,  Pa. 

Rev.  H.  P.  Dewey,  Concord,  N.  H. 

Rev.  Frederick  J.  Bassett,  Providence,  R.  I. 

Rev.  David  S.  Schaff,  Jacksonville,  111. 

(Dr.  Schaff  makes  numerous  slight  altera- 
tions, but  accepts  the  general  statement 
as  a  whole.) 

Rev.  D.  M.  Fisk,  Toledo,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Wallace  Radcliffe,  D.  D.,  Detroit,  Mich. 

Rev.  George  C.  Foley,  Williamsport,  Pa. 

Rev.  Francis  Edward  Smiley,  Denver,  Colo. 

Rev.  James  B.  Nisbett,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  T.  Eaton  Clapp,  Manchester,  N.  H. 


Rev.  James  R.  Winchester,  D.   D.,  B.  Ph., 

Nashville,  Tenn. :  — 
"  My  convictions  almost  take  in  the  first  (L) 
form.  Man  has  dominion  over  brute 
creation,  and  sometimes  benefits  may 
come  through  a  special  experiment  (of 
a  painless  character).  Humane  experts 
must  decide  that  painless  case." 

Rev.  Henry  M.  Tenney,  Oberlin,  Ohio:  — 
"Exceptions  to  this  rule  should  be  limited 
by  definite  law  to  experiments  essential 
to  the  interests  of  humanity,  and  which 
are  impossible  with  the  use  of  chloro- 
form or  ether,  if  such  there  are." 

Rev.  Wm.  H.Scudder,  Norwich,  N.  Y. :  — 
"  Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain,  and 
restricted  by  utility." 

Rev.  James  Wm.  Ashton,  D.  D.,01ean,  N.Y. : 
"  The  above  expresses  most  nearly  my  view, 
but  should  modify  it  in  exceptional 
cases  by  the  following  one ;  namely, 
Vivisection  restricted  by  utility,  for  the 
same  reason  that  we  observe  the  prin- 
ciple of  utility  in  dealing  with  similar 
exigencies  in  the  human  subject." 

Rev.  Willis  E.  Parsons,  Danville,  111. 

Rev.  Wm.  D.  Williams,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

Rev.  J.  L.  Countermine,  Marinette,  Wis. 

Rev.  David  D.  Marsh,  Unionville,  Conn. 

Rev.  C.  E.  Dickinson,  Marietta,  Ohio  :  — 
"  I  can  easily  see  that  vivisection  is  valuable 
to  science;  at  the  same  time,  God  has 
given  nerves  to  animals  as  he  has  to  us. 
They  suffer  pain  as  we  do,  and  I  con- 
ceive we  have  no  right  to  inflict  upon 
them  needless  pain.  Since  we  can  use 
amesthetics  with  animals  as  well  as  with 
man,  it  is  our  duty  to  do  so.  I  would 
therefore  most  heartily  vote  for  j'our. 
second  proposition." 

Rev.  Marc  St.  Darling,  Sioux  City,  Iov\:a. 

Rev.  0.  S.  Bunting,  Trenton,  N.  J. 

Rev.  S.  P.  Dunlap,  M.  A.,  Springfield,  Ohio. 

Rev.  W.  F.  Markwick,  Ansonia,  Conn. 

Rev.  Perry  Wayland  Sinks, Painesville,  Ohii; : 
"  I  find  myself  in  substantial  accord  wiili 
the  second  view,  with  a  leaning  toward 
the  first." 

Rev.  F.  p.  Davenport,  Memphis,  Tenn. 


President  Orello  Cone,  D.  D.,  Buchtel  College,  Akron,  Ohio. 
President  S.  G.  Gilbreath,  B.  Sc,  Hiwassee  College,  Tenn. 
President  Jeeie.  Moore,  D.  D.,  Tusculum,  Tenn, :  — 

"  Vivisection  allowable  under  law." 
President  Samuel  Plantz,  Lawrence  University,  Appleton,  Wis. 


VIVISECTION   ALLOWABLE   IF    WITHOUT    PAIN.  33 

President  J.  D.  Shtrey,  A.  M.,  North  Carolina  College,  Mt.  Plea- 
sant, K.  C. :  — 

"  In  the  main  I  agree  with  the  above.  It  expresses  my  sentiments  more 
nearly  than  either  of  the  others." 

President  Lemuel  H.  Mublin-,  A.  B.,  Baker  University,  Kansas. 
President    D.    R.    Dungan,    A.  M.,    LL.D.,    Cotner    University, 
Lincoln,  Neb. 

President  John  H.  Finley,  Ph.D.,  Knox  College,  111. 
James  W.  Mokey,  A.  M.,  Lakewood  Heights  School,  N.  J. 
F.  B.Knapp,  S.  B.,  Powder  Point  School,  Duxbury,  Mass.,  Presi- 
dent of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  Partridge  Academy :  — 

"I  do  not  wholly  agree  with  this  statement.  I  am  sure  that  I  am  opposed 
to  vivisection  under  nearly  all  conditions,  and  am  not  sure  that  I  would  ap- 
prove it  in  any,  but  might  under  very  exceptional  circumstances,  and  so  do 
not  quite  agree  with  No.  I." 

Mr.  Wm.  C.  Collar,  Teacher,  Eoxbnry,  Mass. 

President  W.  G.  Compher,  A.M.,  Scio  College,  Scio,  Ohio. 

President  W.  M.  Grier,  D.  D.,  Erskine  College,  Due  West,  S.  C. 

President   Holmes    Dysinger,     D.  D.,    Carthage     College,    Car- 
thage, 111. 

President  J.  W.  Bissell,  D.  D.,   Upper  Iowa  University,  Fayette, 
Iowa. 

President  J.  J.  Mills,  A.  M.,  LL.D.,  Earlham  College,  Richmond, 
Indiana. 

President  James  Rogers,  S.  C.  &  C,  A.  M.,  St.  Joseph's  College, 
Cincinnati,  Ohio:  — 

"  Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain,  and  restricted  by  utility." 

President  B.  W.  Baker,  M.  A.,  Ph.D.,  Chaddock  College,  Quincy, 
Illinois. 

President  H.  W.  McKnight,  D.  D.,  LL.D.,  Pennsylvania  College, 
Gettysburg,  Pa. :  — 

"  I  object  to  the  repetition  of  experiments  long  since  made,  simply  for  the 

entertainment  of  classes.     I  would  limit  it  to  new  experiments,  and  then  only 

with  painlessness  and  for  the  highest  ends." 

Prof.  Thomas  R.  Baker,  Rollins  College,  Winter  Park,  Fla. 
Hon.  W.  H.  Upham,  Governor  of  Wisconsin,  Madison,  Wis. 


Hon.    James    M.    Brown,    Attorney-at-Law, 
President  of  the  Toledo  Humane  Society, 
Toledo,  Ohio. 
Hon.  .John  Day  Smith,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 
Richard  F.  Reed,  Natchez,  Miss. :  — 

"  Our  dominion  over  animals  carries  with 
it  a  great  trust.     We  are  to  protect 


them  in  their  rights,  chief  among  which 
is  freedom  from  torture.  I  am  opposed 
to  vivisection  for  demonstration;  and 
unless  the  benefit  to  mankind  from  it  is 
very  decided,  I  am  opposed  to  it  abso- 
lutely." 
Mr.  Chas.  R.  Eraser,  Canton,  Ohio. 


34 


VIVISECTION    RESTRICTED    BY    UTILITY. 


Mrs.  Lily  Lord  Tifft,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Hon.  W.  A.  Calderhead,  M.  C,  Attorney-at- 
Law,  Marysville,  Kansas  :  — 
"  Nothing  but  the  highest  moral  purpose  can 
give  science  her  authority ;  and  when 
the  sense  of  moral  responsibility  leaves 
the  operator,  every  experiment  in  sci- 
ence becomes  dangerous  to  man.  The 
third  statement  modified  by  this  II. 
expresses  my  views." 

Hon.  James  H.  Kyle,  U.  S.  Senator,  Aberdeen, 

So.  Dakota;  — 

"  This  most  nearly  accords  with  my  views. 

In   the  interests   of  medical  science  I 

think  experiments  should  be  made;  but 

I  abhor  torture  in  every  form." 

Hon.  Robert  Neill,  M.  C,  Batesville,  Ark. 

Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt,  M.  C,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Hon.  W.  VV.  Bowers,  M.  C,  San  Diego,  Cal. 

Hon.  J.  S.  Willis,  M.  C,  Milford,  Del. 

Hon.  Benson  Wood,  .M.  C,  Effingham,  111.     ' 

Hon.  C.  J.  Boatner,  M  C,  Monroe,  La.:  — 
"  Barbarism  can  hardly  be  conducive  to  in- 
vestigation or  the  promotion  of  science, 
and  if  it  is,  the  price  paid  would  be  too 
dear.  Unless  the  animal  is  protected 
in  some  way  from  the  torture  necessarily 
inflicted  by  the  operation,  it  should  not 
be  permitted." 

Hon.  C.  D.  Clark,  Evanston,  Mo. 

Mr.  Philip  G.   Low,  307  Lenox  Ave.,  New 

York  City. 
Hon.  Jas.  H.  Huling.M.  C,  CharlePton,W.  Va. 
Hon.  Walter  Evans,  M  C,  Louisville,  Ky.; 
"Vivisection  allowable  if  without  pain,  at 

the  same  time  likely  to  lead  to  useful 

results." 

Hon.  S.  W.  Kerr,  M.  C  ,  Mansfield,  Ohio. 
Sir  Eizak  Pitman,  Bath,  England. 


Hon.  Robert  J.  Tracewell,  M.  C,  A.  M., 
Corydon,  Md. :  — 
"I  would  qualify  above  as  follows:  (1)  If 
there  was  a  doubt  as  to  whether  aiiv 
particular  operation  was  painful,  I 
would  resolve  the  doubt  in  favor  of 
the  animal,  and  prohibit  this  operation 
by  law.  (2)  The  operation  should  not 
be  performed  on  the  higher  order  of 
animals,  such  as  monkey,  horse,  or 
dog." 

Mr.  A.  J.  Rowland,  Sec.  Am.  Bap.  Pub.  Soc, 

1420  Chestnut  St.,  Phila.,  Pa. 
Mr.  David  H.  Moore,  Editor  of  the  "  Western 

Christian  Advocate,"  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 
Mr.   Charles  W.   Lincoln,    Editor    of   "The 

Press,"  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Rev.  Thomas  Diumm,  M.  D.,  22  State  Street, 

New  York  City. 
Mr.  John  W.  Freese,  A.M.,  Teacher,  Cam- 
bridge, Mass. 
Mr.  Frederick  S.  Cutter,  Teacher,  Cambridge, 

Mass. 
Miss  Caroline  T.   Haven,  Prin.    Kin.  Dep't., 

Working-Man's  School,  New  York  'City. 
Mr.  Charles  W.  Birtwell,  Gen.   Sec.   Boston 
Children's  Aid  Soc,  Boston,  Mass. :  — 
"I  should  disapprove  of  vivisection  of  any 
kind  for  purposes  of  demonstration,  and 
should  approve  only  of  painless  vivisec- 
tion   by    original    investigators    under 
State  appointment  and  regulation.      I 
should    favor  absolute    prohibition    of 
vivisection  if  I  did  not  give  the  benefit 
of  the  doubttotheclaim  that  vivisection 
may  beneiit  mankind." 

Mrs.  Charles  G.  Ames,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Charles  E.  Woodcock,  Christ  Church, 

Ansonia,  Conn. 
Rev.  W.  Tatlock,  D.  D.,  Stamford,  Conn. 


III.     VIVISECTION   RESTRICTED   BY  UTILITY. 

Vivisection  is  a  practice  of  such  variety  and  complexity,  that, 
like  warfare  between  nations,  one  can  neither  condemn  it  nor  approve 
it  unless  some  careful  distinctions  be  first  laid  down.  We  hold  that 
only  a  great  and  definite  advantage  to  the  interests  of  humanity  can 
justify  its  use,  and  that  in  each  case  Science  must  prove  that  advan- 
tage and  that  necessity;  its  hands  should  not  be  left  free  to  inflict 
torture  without  restriction  or  restraint.     Even  the  zeal  of  a  Magendie 


YIVISECTION    RESTRICTED    BY    UTILITY.  35 

or  a  Mantegazza  cannot  condone  their  cruelty,  nor  can  Science  make 
the  search  for  a  fact  obliterate  the  distinctions  between  right  and 
wrong.  Within  certain  limitations  we  regard  Vivisection  to  be  so 
justifie'd  by  utility  as  to  be  legitimate,  expedient,  and.  right.  Beyond 
these  boundaries  it  is  cruel ,  monstrous,  and  wrong. 

Experimentation  upon  living  animals  we  consider  justifiable  when 
employed  to  determine  the  action  of  new  remedies ;  for  tests  of  sus- 
pected poisons ;  for  the  study  of  new  methods  of  surgical  procedure, 
or  in  the  search  for  the  causation  of  disease,  —  in  short,  for  any 
object  where  the  probable  benefi  to  mankind  is  very  great,  and  the 
suffering  inflicted  not  greater  than  that  of  instantaneous  death,  nor 
more  than  the  pain  and  distress  of  the  human  ailments  to  alleviate 
which  the  experiment  is  made.  On  the  other  hand,  we  regard  as 
cruel  and  wrong  the  infliction  of  torment  upon  animals  in  the  search 
for  physiological  facts  which  have  no  conceivable  relation  to  the 
treatment  of  human  diseases;  or  experiments  that  seem  to  be  made 
only  for  the  purpose  of  gratifying  a  heartless  curiosity,  —  such,  for 
example,  as  those  described,  in  the  work  of  Professor  Mantegazza, 
entitled  "The  Effect  of  Pain  upon  Respiration." 

We  consider  as  ivholly  unjustifiable  the  common  practice  in  the 
United  States^  of  subjecting  animals  to  torture  in  the  laboratory  or 
classroom,  merely  for  the  purpose  of  demonstrating  well-known  and 
accepted  facts.  We  hold  that  the  infliction  of  torment  upon  a  living 
animal  under  such  circumstances  is  not  justified  by  necessity,  nor 
is  it  a  fitting  exhibition  for  the  contemplation  of  youth.  And  since 
in  England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland  such  experiments  as  these  are 
regarded  as  degrading  in  tendency,  and  are  therefore  forbidden  by 
law,  we  think  no  harm  will  come  to  Science  if  they  shall  also  be 
forbidden  in  every  American  State. 

We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  common  interests  of  Humanity 
and  Science  demand  that  Vivisection,  like  the  study  of  human 
anatomy  in  the  dissecting-room,  should  be  brought  under  the  direct 
supervision  and  control  of  the  State.  The  practice,  whether  in 
public  or  in  private,  should  be  restricted  by  law  to  certain  definite- 
objects,  and  surrounded  by  every  possible  safeguard  against  license 
or  abuse.  • 

[Several  shades  of  opinion  are  represented  by  the  sisnatures  to  this  state- 
ment. As  a  rule,  disagreement  is  indicated  by  various  erasures  of  words, 
sentences,  or  paragraphs,  made  in  order  to  shape  the  phraseology  of  the  state- 
ment into  accord  with  individual  views.  The  signers  of  this  statement  may  be 
classified  as  follows  :  — 

1.  Those  who  have  signed  the  statement  without  changing  it  in  any  way. 
Many  of  these  have  even  underscored  certain  sentences,  particularly  in  the  last 
paragraph. 


36  VIVISECTION   EESTRICTED   BY   UTILITY. 

2.  Those  who  agree  in  the  condemnation  of  torture  as  a  method  of  teachinc 
well-known  physiological  facts,  and  in  general  approval  of  State  supervision 
and  control  of  Vivisection ;  but  who,  for  various  reasons,  prefer  to  soften  and 
change  the  phraseology  of  the  statement  in  less  important  particulars.  Their 
eliminations  sometimes  refer  to  single  words  or  short  phrases,  such  as  "  mon- 
strous," "  wholly,  unjustifiable,"  "  very  great,"  *'  the  common  practice,"  "  must 
prove  necessity,"  "a  great  advantage,"  etc.;  or  they  may  affect  entire  sen- 
tences, such  as  the  attempt  to  define  the  limits  of  permissible  pain-infliction, 
the  allusion  to  Magendie  and  Mantagazza,  and  particularly  the  reference  to  the 
examj^le  of  Great  Britain.     (This  last  clause  is  to  man}-  especially  obnoxious.) 

3.  Those  who  denounce  or  condemn  the  use  of  torture  as  a  method  of  teach- 
ing well-known  facts,  but  who  cannot  approve  of  any  appeal  to  legislation  for 
its  prohibition.  As  a  rule,  those  who  take  this  position  would  place  no  impedi- 
ments in  the  way  of  any  original  research  in  any  direction.  Disapproval  of 
minor  points  in  the  phraseology  of  the  statement  is  quite  common. 

4.  Those  who  believe  that  Vivisection  should  be  under  more  or  less  super- 
vision by  the  State,  but  who  apparently  would  not  condemn  even  painful 
experiments  for  teaching  purposes,  if  in  the  judgment  of  the  teacher  pain  can 
be  thus  made  "  useful." 

o.  Those  whose  erasures,  changes,  and  eliminations  affect  absolutely  and 
vitallj'  every  important  part  of  the  entire  statement.  They  do  not  approve  of 
supervision  nor  restraint,  nor  do  they  condemn  any  form  of  experimentation  for 
any  object.  It  is  not  easy  to  perceive  wherein  their  views  differ  from  those  who 
favor  "  Vivisection  without  Restrictions  "  of  any  kin(f.  It  would,  of 
course,  be  a  mistake  to  count  these  names  with  those  of  the  majority  who  favor 
the  leading  jirinciples  of  the  statement  and  restricted  vivisection.]- 


1.    Signed  as  -written,  -without  Chang;e. 

Herbert  Spencer,  Author,  London, 

Sir  Edwin  Arnold,  Author,  and  Editor  of  the  "  London  Tele- 
graph," London : — 

"  It  is  with  this  that  1  agree,  detesting  and  dreading  unlicensed  vivisection. 
But  I  love  and  honour  Science  too  much  to  deny  her  any  right,  exercised 
with  true  scientific  spirit ;  that  is,  with  reverence,  mercy,  and  love  to  all 
livino-  things.  I  would  hardly  allow  even  an  angel  to  vivisect  without 
anfesthetics.*' 

The  fourth  statement.  Sir  Edwin  Arnold  characterizes  as  "  the  language 
of  scientific  devils." 

Egbert  Braithwatte,  M.  D.,  "F.  L.  S.,  London  :  — 

"...  After  facts  have  been  sufficiently  established,  it  is  not  necessary 
to  repeat  experiments  for  individual  satisfaction,  still  less  for  demonstration 
to  students ;  the  facts  should  be  accepted  from  the  teacher  equally  with  other 
facts  which  cannot  be  demonstrated." 

President  David  H.  Cochran,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,   Polytechnic  Insti- 
tute, Brooklyn,  N.  Y.  • 


VIVISECTION   EESTEICTED    BY   UTILITY.  37 

President   Martin    Kellogg,    LL.D.,    University   of    California, 
Berkeley,  Cal. 

President  Henry  Wade  Eogers,  LL.D.,  Northwestern  University, 
Evanston,  111. 

President  Elmer  H.  Capen,  D.  D.,  Tufts  College,  Mass. 

President  Charles  Kendall  Adams,  LL.D.,  University  of  Wis- 
consin, Madison,  Wis. 

E.  H.  Thurston,  LL.D.,  Director  of  Sibley  College,  Cornell  Uni- 
versity, Ithaca,  ]Sr.  Y. 

C.  C.  Everett,  D.  D.,  Dean  of  Harvard  Divinity  School,  Cambridge, 
Mass. 

George    Hodges,  D.  D.,  Dean  of   Episcopal  Theological   School, 
Cambridge,  Mass. 

James  0.  Murray,  Dean  of  Princeton  University,  Princeton,  N.  J. 

Cyrus    Northrop,    LL.D.,   President    University   of   Minnesota, 
Minneapolis,  Minn. :  — 

"  Vivisection  is  practised  more  than  is  necessary  ;  it  ought  undoubtedly 

to  be  restrained.     Doubtless  it  has  its  uses  in  teacliing,  but  its  value  in  inves- 
tigation has  been  overrated." 

Prof.' William  James,  M.  D.,  Author ;  Professor  of  Psychology, 
Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass. :  — 

"If  public  opinion  could  constitute  the  check,  I  should  prefer  that;  but 
that  would  necessarily  be  ineffectual.  I  think  there  will  be  cjreat  difficulty 
in  defining  by  law  what  is  legitimate,  or  in  having  wliatever  law  were  made, 
discriminatingly  administered.  In  principle,  however,  I  have  not  a  moment's 
hesitation  in  standing  up  for  the  vivisector  being  outwardly  responsible  for 
his  acts." 

Kt.  Rev.  Henry  A.  Neely,  Bishop  of  Maine  :  — 

"  The  above  statement  most  nearly  expresses  my  views.  If  the  opinions 
of  Sir  Charles  Bell,  Dr.  Lawson  Tait,  and  Dr.  Bell-Taylor  (quoted  in  the  first 
statement)  were  generally  endorsed  by  pathologists  of  the  highest  class,  it 
would  follow,  me  j'udice,  that  vivisection  can  in  no  case  be  justified." 

Et.  Eev.  Joseph  Blount  Cheshire,  Jr.,  Bishop  of  South  Carolina  : 
"  While  as  a  matter  of  sentiment  I  am  strongly  inclined  to  say  that  vivi 
section  should  be  absolutely  prohibited,  yet  I  am  not  able  to  justify  that 
position  fully  to  my  mind  and  conscience.  The  statement  of  '  vivisection 
restricted  by  utility,'  seems  to  me  to  be  in  accordance  with  relations  which 
God  has  established  and  declared  between  man  and  the  lower  orders  of 
living  creatures.  Vivisection  should  be  allowed  only  in  case  of  necessity  or 
•  of  great  utility,  and  then  under  strict  regulations." 

Et.  Eev.  Mahlon  N.  Gilbert,  Asst.  Bishop  of  Minnesota. 

Et.  Rev.  Charles  Todd  Quintard,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  Tennessee. 

Et.  Eev.  Anson  E.  Graves,  LL.D.,  Bishop  of  The  Platte. 


38  VIVISECTION   KESTEICTED    BY   UTILITY. 

Et.  Rev.  Alexander  Burgess,  Bishop  of  Quincy. 

Rt.  Rev.  CoRTLANDT  WHITEHEAD,  Bishop  of  Pittsburg. 

Rt.  Rev.  George  W.  Peterkin,  LL.D.,   Bishop  of  West  Virginia. 

Rt.  Rev.  P.  D.  Huntington,  Bishop  of  Central  New  York. 

Rt.  Rev.  Lemuel  H.  Wells,  Bishop  of  Spokane. 

Rt.  Rev,  Nelson  Somerville  Rulison,  Assistant  Bishop  of 
Central  Pennsylvania. 

Prof.  T.  M.  Balliet,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Therapeutics,  Dartmouth 
Medical  College,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Prof.  T.  Gaillard  Thomas,  M.D.,  College  of  Physicians  and  Sur- 
geons, Consulting  Surgeon  of  the  State  Women's  Hospital,  N.  Y. 

Simon  Baruch,  M.  D.,  Physician  to  the  Manhattan  General  Hospi- 
tal, N.  Y.,  and  late  Physician  and  Surgeon  to  the  N.  Y.  Juv.  Asylum. 
(Would  jDermit  vivisection  for  demonstration,  under  anaesthesia.) 

Prof.  Geo.  Montgomery  Tuttle,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Gynaecology 
in  the  College  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons,  New  York. 

Prof.  Andrev/  H.  Smith,  M.  D.,  Post-Graduate  School,  Attending 
Physician  of  the  Presbyterian  Hosi^ital,  New  York. 

Prof.  Alonzo  Bootiiby,  M.  D.,  Associate  Professor  of  Surgery, 
Boston,  School  of  Medicine  :  — 

"  It  does  not  seem  clear  upon  what  grounds  j'ou  are  making  the  inquiry  ; 
but  as  the  matter  is  a  very  important  one,  and  as  there  has  been  such  an  un- 
necessary and  absurd  use  of  animals  to  amuse  students  and  idlers,  I  send  you 
my  protest,  with  the  hope  that  your  object  is  to  lessen  the  evil." 

Daniel  Cook,  M.  D.,  New  York  City  :  — 

"  In  my  experience,  certain  vivisections  are  performed  mostly  for  the 
most  unworthy  object  of  making  the  lectures  sensational  above  those  at  other 
colleges,  —  exactly  as  our  theatres  and  newspapers  vie  with  one  another  in 
furnishing  blood-curdling  plays,  or  sensational  news." 

John  Allan  Wyeth,  M.  D.,  President  of  the  Faculty  of  the  New 
York  Polyclinic  Medical  School  and  Hospital,  New  York. 

Albert  McScully,  M.  D.,  M.  Ch.,  L.  M.,  Queen's  University,  for- 
merly Assistant  Demonstrator  of  Anatomy  in  Queen's  College,  Ireland, 
New  York  City  :  — 

"  A  person  actively  engaged  in  vivisection  is  inclined  to  subscribe  to  the 
fourth  statement.  The  whole  mind  is  absorbed  in  the  subject ;  and  clear 
unbiassed  reasoning  is  then  out  of  the  question.  I  felt  thus  myself,  at  one 
time,  when  full  of  my  subject,  as  well  as  full  of  youthful  ardor.  After  mature 
deliberation,  I  freely  and  unconditionally  subscribe  to  this  statement."     , 

G.  B.  Hope,  M.  D.,  New  York  City  :  — 

"  From  what  I  have  been  witness  to  in  several  steps  of  my  student  career, 
I  am  heartily  in  sympathy  with  your  investigation.  I  believe  in  the  severest 
control   governing  vivisection.      Every   class-room    exhibition    jiarticularly 


VIVISECTION   KESTEICTED    BY   UTILITY.  39 

should  be  prohibited  as  useless  and  demoralizing.  I  would  have  every  ex- 
perimenter file  an  application,  giving  the  nature  and  intention  of  the  oper- 
ation, and  subsequently  report  the  number,  size,  and  quality  of  animals 
employed,  with  the  results  obtained.  Such  a  course  would  check  needless 
and  vicious  operations." 

(Dr.  Hope  graduated  twenty  years  ago  from  a  medical  college  notorious 
for  its  extreme  vivisections.) 

Archibald  T.  Baxxing,  M,D.,  Pres.  City  Medical  Association, 
Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y.  :  — 

"  I  well  remember  when  a  student  the  feelings  of  horror  that  arose  on 
seeing  certain  experiments.  .  .  .  The  first  experiment  was  altogether  an  out- 
rage ;  the  second,  though  of  some  utility,  had  already  been  sufficiently 
demonstrated,  and  a  mere  statement  from  the  professor  would  have  accom- 
plished as  much  instruction  as  ocular  evidence.  The  impression  thus  made 
on  the  unformed  minds  of  students  is  bad,  and  might  have  a  tendency  to 
develop  some  morbid  psychopathic  action  such  as  '  Sadism.'  I  have  such 
cases  in  view." 

John  L.  Schoolcraft,  M.  D.,  Schenectady^  IST.  Y.  :  — 

"  The  continual  practice  of  vivisection  by  assistant  lecturers  and  others 
to  show  what  has  been  thoroughly  proven  by  men  of  reputation,  should  be 
absolutely  prohibited." 

William  J.  Burr,  M.  D.,  late  Acting  Staff-Surgeon,  TJ.  S.  A., 
Newark  Valley,  N.  Y. :  — 

,  "  I  have  seen  most  kindly  conducted  experiments,  and  also  others  most 
abhorrent.  In  my  opinion,  vivisection  should  be  under  restrictions,  and 
conducted  without  pain." 

S.  P.  MooRE,  M.  D.,  Munnville,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  I  am  aware  that  we  are  apt  to  forget  what  is  right  in  efforts  after  fame. 
As  I  grow  older,  certain  scenes  before  a  class  of  young  men  seem  to  me  of 
very  doubtful  propriety.  Medical  students  are  apt  to  be  rough  enough  with- 
out such  sights." 

Jonathan  Kneeland,  M.D.,   S.  Onondaga,  !N".  Y.  :  — 

"  If  we  know  less  of  the  mysteries  of  existence  by  refraining  from  tor- 
menting our  pets,  we  shall  at  any  rate  increase  the  total  joy  of  animal  life." 

William  H.  Munn,  M.  D.,  New  York  City :  — 

"  iSTo  undergraduate  to  attempt  it ;  only  by  a  professor,  and  with  the 
least  pain." 

John  Parmenter,'M.  D.,  Prof,  of  Anatomy  and  Clinical  Surgery, 
University  of  Buffalo,  Surgeon  to  the  Erie  Co.  Fitch  and  Children's 
Hospitals,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Archibald  M.  Campbell,  M.  D.,  Consulting  Physician  in  tlie  Home 
for  Incurables,  N.  Y.  City,  Member  of  the  Academy  of  Medicine, 
Physician  to  the  N.  Y.  Infant  Asylum,  etc.,  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y. 


40  VIVISECTION   EESTRICTED   BY   UTILITY. 

Herman  Mynter,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Surgery,  Niagara  University, 
Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

James  E.  Kelly,  M.  D.,  F.  E.  C.  S.,  Consulting  Surgeon,  French 
Hospital,  New  York  City. 

0.  B.  Douglass,  M.  D.,  Surgeon  to  the  Manhattan  Eye  and  Ear 
Hospital,  late  President  of  the  Medical  Society  of  the  county  of  New 
York,  etc. 

Charles  S.  Mack,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Materia  Medica  and  Ther- 
apeutics, University  of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor,  Mich.  :  — 

« 
"...  Regard  as  useless  much  that  some  regard  as  useful." 

George  M.  Gould,  M.  D.,  Editor  of  the  "  Medical  News,"  Phila- 
delphia, Pa. :  — 

"  Whenever  possible,  under  anaesthesia." 

(Dr.  Gould's  views  regarding  vivisection  have  been  well  expressed  in  his 
recent  work  on  biological  investigation,  "  The  Meaning  and  Method  of  Life," 
from  which  we  quote  and  italicize  the  following  passage  :  "  If  a  A'ery  limited 
use  of  vivisection  experiment  is  necessary  for  scientific  and  medical  progress, 
it  7nust  be  regulated  by  law,  carried  out  with  jealous  guarding  against  excess 
and  against  suffering,  and  the  maimed  animals  painlessly  killed  when  the 
experiment  is  complete,  ilie  practice  carried  on  by  conceited  jackanapes  to 
prove  over  and  over  again  already  ascertained  results,  to  minister  to  egotism,  for 
didactic  purposes,  — these  are  not  necessary,  and  must  be  forbidden.") 

Isaac  Sharpless,  LL.D.,  President  of  Haverford  College,  Pa. 

A.  H.  Fetterolf,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  President  of  Girard  College, 
Philadelphia,  Pa. 

W.  F.  McDowell,  D.  D.,  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Denver, 
Colorado. 

Wm.  M.  Blackburn",  D.  D.,  LL.D.,  President  of  Pierre  University, 
Pierre,  S.  D. 

W.  H.  Scott,  LL.D.,  President  of  the  Ohio  State  University, 
Columbus,  Ohio. 

Francis  Wayland,  LL.D.,  Dean  of  Yale  Law  School,  New 
Haven,  Ct. 

Franklin  W.  Hooper,  Director  of  the  Institute  of  Arts  and  Sci- 
ences, Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Edwin  J.  Houston,  Electrical  Expert,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Edward  S.  Holden,  LL.D.,  Astronomer,  Director  of  Lick  Obser- 
vatory, Mt.  Hamilton,  California. 

Prof.  Henry  Fairfield  Osborn,  Da  Costa  Professor  of  Biology, 
Columbia  Coll.,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  James  L.  Robertson,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Theory  and  Practice, 
Am.  Veterinary  College,  N.  Y.  City. 

Eev.  Samuel  A.  Barnett,  Warden  of  Toynbee  Hall,  London, 
England. 


VIVISECTION   EESTKICTED    BY   UTILITY.'  41 

Hamo  Thoknyckoft,  K.  A.,  Sculptor,  Loudon,  England. 
Dr.  Ha VELOCK  Ellis,  Editor  of  the  <' Contemporary  Science  Series," 
Cornwall,  England. 

Edward  Bkeck,  Ph.D.,  Journalist,  Berlin:  — 

"  A  limitation  to  one  or  two  laboratories  in  each  State  might  be  wise." 

Francis  F.  Browne,  Editor  of  '<The  Dial,"  Chicago,  111.:  — 

"  Believing  that  all  the  relations  of  men  to  animals,  like  the  relations  of 
men  to  each  other,  should  be  subject  to  State  regulation,  I  of  course  hold 
that  vivisection  should  be  under  such  control,  and  very  stringently." 

Prof.  Wm.  a.  Packard,  Princeton  University,  New  Jersey. 
Prof.  GrEORGE  M.  Harper,  Ph.D.,  Princeton  University,  N.  J. 
Prof.  Benj.  Ide  Wheeler,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Prof.*EDWARD  Hitchcock,  Jr.,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Prof.  Charles  E.  Bennett,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  IS".  Y. 
Prof.  GeorCxE  p.  Bristol,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. :  — 
"  In  hearty  sympathy  with  this  statement." 

Prof.  Egbert  Baird,  Northwestern  University,  111. 

Prof.  Charles  F.  Bradley,  D.  D.,  Garrett  Biblical  Institution, 
Evanston,  111. 

Prof.  John  M.  Shaller,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  College 
of  Medicine  and  Surgery,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Prof.  C.  F.  Brackett,  M.  D.,  LL.D.,  President  of  the  Board  of 
Health  for  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  Professor  of  Physics,  Prince- 
ton, N.  J. 

Prof.  Wm.  Francis  Magie,  Ph.D.  (Berlin),  Professor  of  Physics, 
Princeton  College,  N.  J. 

Prof.  Francis  H.  Herrick,  Biologist,  Adelbert  College,  Cleve- 
land, 0. 

.    Prof.  Ogden   N.  Kood,  Professor  of  Physics,  Columbia   College, 
New  York. 

Prof.  Charles  B.  At  well,  Ph.M.,  Professor  of  Botany,  N.  W. 
University,  Evanston,  111. 

Prof.  A.  E.  Turner,  A.  M.,  Professor  Natural  Sciences,  Lincoln 
University,  111. 

Prof.  Henry  .  B.  Cornwall,  Professor  of  Chemistry,  Princeton 
University,  N.  J. 

Prof.  Henry  L.  Obetz,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Surgery,  University 
of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor. 

Prof.  Frederick  Tracy,  Ph.D.,  Lecturer  in  Psychology,  Univer- 
sity of  Toronto,  Canada. 

Prof.  John  C.  Branner,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Geology,  Stanford 
University,  Cal. 


42  VIVISECTION    EESTKICTED    BY    UTILITY. 

Prof.  Albert  Nott,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology  and  Dean  of 
Tufts  College  Medical  School,  Mass. 

Prof.  Albert  E.  Miller,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  College 
of  Physicians  and  Surgeons,  Boston,  Mass. 

Prof.  A.  A.  D'Ancojsta,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  University 
of  California,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

Pres.  Alvah  Hovey,  D.  D.,  LL  D.,  President  of  the  Newton  Theo- 
logical Institute,  Newton,  Mass. 

Prof.  Arthur   S.  Hoyt,   A.  M.,   D.  D.,  Auburn  Theological  Semi- 
nary, Auburn,  N.  Y. 

Prof.   Geo.    R.    Freeman,  A.M.,   D.B.,    Meadville    Theological 
School,  Penn. 

Prof.  Wooster   W.    Beman.   A.  M.,  University  of  Michigan,  Ann 
Arbor,  Mich.  * 

Prof.  Benj.  S.  Torrey,  University  of  Chicago,  111. 

Prof.  W.  H.  Mace,  A.  M.,  Syracuse  University,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  Franklin  J.  Holzwarth,  Ph.D.,  Syracuse  University,  N.Y. 

Prof,   Eugene    Haanel,   Ph.D.,  Professor   of   Physics,   Syracuse 
University,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  John  R.  French,  Vice-Chaucellor,  Syracuse  University,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  L.  A.  Sherman,  Lincoln,  Neb. 

Prof.  A.  T.  MuRijAY,  Stanford  University,  CaV. 

Prof,  Leveritt  W.  Spring,  Williams  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  L.  D,  WooDBRiDGE,  M.  D.,  Williams  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  Anson  D.  Mor^e,  M.  A.,  Amherst  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  Clifford  H.  Moore,  University  of  Chicago,  111. 

Prof.  John  B.  Clark,  Amherst  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  J.  B.  Parkinson,  University  of  Wisconsin,  Madison,  Wis. 

Prof.  Walter  D.  Toy,  University  of  North  Carolina. 

Prof.  E.  W.  Hyde,  University  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Prof.  Charles  E.  Fay,  A.  M.,  Tufts  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  Edward    A.    Allen,    Lit.    Dr.,    University    of    Missouri, 
Columbia. 

Prof.  Isaac  N.  Demmon,  University  of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor. 

Prof.  Charles  Davidson,  Ph.D.,  Adelbert  College,  Cleveland,  0. 

Prof.  G.  T.  Knight,  Tufts  College,  Mass.  . 

Prof.  Cornelius    B.  Bradley,   A.  M.,    University  of    California, 
Berkeley,  Cal. :  • — 

"  I  should  wish  to  go  a  step  further,  and  while  not  absolutely  limiting 
vivisection  to  painless  forms,  as  is  done  in  statement  II.,  1  think  that  the 
manner  of  it  should  always  be  determined  by  considerations,  of  humanity  ;  it 
should  be  painless  in  all  caaen  xcliere  painleaanesx  will  serve  the  purposes  of  an 
otherwise  useful  and  desirable  investigation.  While  I  am  aware  of  the  diffi- 
culty of  enforcing  this  distinction,  I  think  it  important  not  to  attempt  to 
make  pain  the  sole  factor  in  the  decision." 


VIVISECTION   EESTRICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


43 


Prof.  Arthur  T.  Hadley,  Yale  University,  New  Haven. 

Prof.  Frederic  D.  Allex,  Ph.I>.,  Harvard  University,  Cambridge. 

Prof.  Eugene  L.  Eichards,  Yale  University,  I^ew  Haven. 

Prof.  C.  G.  E.OCKWOOD,  Jr.,  Princeton  University,  New  Jersey. 

Francis  A.  Schlitz,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

D.  H.  GooDVi^iLLiE,  M.D.,  New  York. 

Thos.  Gilfillan,  M.  D.,  Northampton,  jNIass. 

Prof.  James  H.  Eobixson,  Ph.D.,  Columbia  College,  New  York. 

Prof.  J.  Macy,  a.  M.,  Iowa  College,  Grinnell,  Iowa. 

Allen  M.  Thomas,  M.  D.,  President  of  the  N.  Y.  Clinical  Society, 
New  York  City. 

•  J.  Oscoe  Chase,  ^I.  D.,  Assistant  Surgeon  of  the  N.  Y.  Opthalmic 
Hospital,  etc.,  New  York  City. 

John  'L.  Hildreth,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

Prof.  J.  S.  Prout,  M.  D.,  Long  Island  College  Hospital,  Brook- 
lyn,  N.  Y. 


I).  Branch  Clark,  M.  D.,  jSTew  York  City. 

Abel  Huntingdon,  M.  D.,  New  York  Cit3^ 

Jaretl  G.  Baldwin,  M.  D.,  New  York  City: 

•  "  While  I  favor  vivisection  as  necessary  at 
times  for  the  progress  of  science,  and 
would  restrict  it  by  utility,  I  realize  the 
great  difficulty  there  will  be  in  drawing 
the  line  between  utility  and  uselessness. 
.  .  .  Still,  I  think  some  restrictions 
should  be  made." 

Gen.  P.  Shirnier,  M.  D.,  New  York  City: 
"  I  believe  vivisection  is  also  justifiable  for 
the  purpose  of  teaching  facts  already 
known,  when  no  pain  is  caused  either  as 
an  immediate  or  subsequent  result  of 
the  operation." 

Gnrham  Bacon,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Richard  T.  Bang,  JI.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Rt.llin  B.  Gray,  M.  D.,  New  York  City". 

Frederick  Guttman,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Joseph  T.  O'Connor,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Joseph  Eichberg,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

H.O.  Clauss,  M.  D.,  New  York  City, 

Joseph  Braunstein,  M.  D.,  Nevv  York  City. 

K.  P.  Miller,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Krvin  A.  Tucker,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

T.  C.  Williams,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Alexander  Ha  iden,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Andrew  F.  Currier.  M.  D.,  New  York  City: 
"  This  represents,  in  the  main,  my  views  on 
the  subject." 

H.  S.  Drayton,  M.  D..  New  York  City. 

Geo.  L  Simpson,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Thos.  Wilde,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Frank  A.  McGuire,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 


G.  H.  Patchen,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
E.  D.  Franklin,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
L.  L.  Bradshaw,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
John  G.  Perry,  M.  U.,  New  York  City. 
S.  Wesley  Smith,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Ira  B.  Read,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Caroline  L.  Black,  M.  D.,  New  YoiJc  City. 
R.  C.  M.  Page,  M.  D.  (Prof.  New  York  JPoly- 

elinic),  New  York  City. 
J.  Henry  Fruilnight,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

C.  Ruxton  Ellison,  M.  D.,  New  York  City:" 
"This    statement    agrees    with    my    ideas 

of  the  subject  precisely. 
Garret  Cosine,  M.  D.,  New  York  Citj-. 
E.  B.  Foote,  Jr.,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Stephen  J.  Clark,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
A,  H.  Heath,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Sanford  J.  Murray,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Harriette   C.   Keating,   M.  D.,  Sc.  D.,  New 

York  City. 
Floyd  T.  Sheldon,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Seth  D.  Close,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
James  A.  Bennett,  M.  D.,  New  York  City: 

"Allowable   for  demonstration,  if  without 
pain." 
Octavius  A.  White,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

(Adds  last  clause  of  statement  IH.) 
Joseph  Kucher,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Frank  W.  Merriam,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
H.  M.  Hitchcock,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Paul  C.  Boomer,   M.  D.,  Prof,  of  Anatomy, 

etc.,  Chicago,  111. 
John  J.  Orton,  M.  D.,  Lakeville,  Conn. 
J.  N.  Martin,  M.  D.,  Ann  Arbor,  Mich. 

D.  M.  Cattell,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 


44 


VIVISECTION    KESTRICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


Mary  H.  Thompson;  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

Frank  Billings,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

J.  B.  Murdock,  M.  D.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Louis  T.  Riesmeyer,  M.  D.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Francis  B.  Hill,  M.  D.,  Colorado  Springs,  Col. 

Wni.  S.  Stewart,  M.  U.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
(Signs  III.  also.) 

J.  D.  Blake,  M.  D.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Charles  G.  Hill,  M.  D.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

K.  \V.  Baldwin,  M.  D.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

L.  S.  Kelsey.  M.  D.,  Richmond,  Ind. 

D'Estaing  Dickerson,  M.  D.,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 

George  W.  Cale,  M.  D.,  St.  Louis,  Mo, 

Edwin  R.  Maxson,  M.  D. 

Aven  Nelson,  M.  D.,  A.  M..  Prof,  of  Biology 
in  the  University  of  Wyoming,  Laramie: 
"  All  experiments  should  be  painless,  so  far 
as  possible;  and  so  far  as  it  will  not 
interfere  with  success  of ,  the  experi- 
ments." (The  last  clause  nullities  the 
statement.) 

George  E.  Paul,  M.  D.,  Rutland,  Vt. 

Ross  Wilson,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

H.  S.  Maxson,  M.  D.,  St.  Helena,  Cal. 

W.  H.  Maxson,  M.  D.,  St.  Helena,  Cal.: 
"  As  far  as  possible  without  pain." 

Edmund  J.  A.  Rogers,  M.  D.,  Denver,  Col. 

James  W,  Ovenpeck,  M.  D.,  Haniillon,  Ohio. 

Ida  B.  Hunt,  M.  D.,  Plainfield,  N.  J. 

L.  M.  Giifin,  M.  D.,  Boulder,  Col. 

W.  A.  Lockwood,  M.  D.,  Norwalk,  Conn. 

Prof.  Walter  S.  Haines,  M.  D.,  Rush  Medical 

College,  Chicago. 
Prof.  J.  M.  Withrow,  M.  D.,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 
John  H.  Thompson,  M.  D.,  New  York  Citj-: 

"Allowable  only  under  an  ana?sthetic." 
Louis  N.  Schultz,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Edwin  West,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
J.  A.  Towner,  M.  D.,  New  York  Cif.v. 
Samuel  G.  Sewall,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Hein-y  Tuck,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
William  F.  Wright,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Thomas  F.  Smith,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Frank  Livermore,  M.  D.,  New  York  Citj-. 
H   H.  Kane,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
0.  S.  Phelps,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Homer  I.  Ostrom,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
P.  J.  Lynch,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Granviile  C.  Brown,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Adoniram  B.  Jud?on,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Reuben  B.  Burton,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Egbert  Guernsey,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
John  E.  Comfort,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Charles  Milne,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
John  P.  Nolan,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
George  B.  Durrie,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 


J.  E.  Janvrin,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Richard  E.  Kunze,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Ephraim   Cutter,   M.  D.,  LL.D.,    New  York 
Cit}'.     (See  extract  from  letter,  p.  65.) 

George  E.  Tytler,  M,  D.,  New  York  City: 
"  Persons  sentenced  to  death  would  serve  a 
most  useful  purpose  if,  before  execution 
of  the  sentence,  thej'  were  subjected  to 
experimentation  in  testing  new  reme- 
dies, etc." 

William  L.  Flemming,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Henry  E.  Crampton,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
W.  P.  Northrup,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Willard  Parker,  M.  U.,  New  York  City. 
Prof.  William  E.  Rounds,  M.  D.,  Professorin 

the  N.  Y.  Opth.  Hospital   College,  New 

York  City. 
Emily  Blackwell,  M.  D.,  Dean  of  the  Woman's 

Medical  College,  New  York  City. 
(Agrees  with  last  clause  of  No.  HI.)  ^ 

S.  A.  Russell,  M.  D.,  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y. : 
"  And  as  far  as  possible  painless." 

F.  A.  Winne,  M.  D.,  Brockport,  N.  Y. 
John  B.  Ellis,  M.  D.,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y. 
J.  H.  Trumbull,  M.  D.,  HornellsviUe,  N.  Y. 
Chas.  P.  Russell,  M.  D.,  u'tica,  N.  Y. 
Chas.  S.  Starr,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
Thos.  M.  Flandrau,  M.  D.,  Rome,  N.  Y. : 
"  Should  be  invariably  mitigated  by  anaes- 
■    thetics." 

Geo.  H.  Noble,  M.  D.,'  Cairo,  N.  Y. 

Geo.  M.  Palmer,  M.  D.,  Warsaw,  N.  Y. 

Pascal  M.  Dowd,  M.  D.,  Oswego,  N.  Y. 

Geo.  B.  Chapman,  M.  D.,  Dover  Plains,  N.  Y. 

M.  M.  Bagg,  M.  D.,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

S.  R.  Welles,  M.  D.,  Waterloo,  N.  Y. 

C.  D.  Spencer,  M.  D.,  Biughamton,  N.  Y,: 

"  I  most  heartih'  endorse  the  above  senti- 
ments." 
A.  Miller,  M.  D.,  Jordanville,  N.  Y. 
Arthur  R.  Hill,  M.  D.,  Farmer,  N.  Y. 
E.  G.  Williams,  M.  D.,  Remsen,  N.  Y. 
J.  W.  Douglass,  M.  D.,  Boonville,  N.  Y. 
H.  Sheldon  Edson,  M.  D.,  Cortland,  N.  Y. 
A.  T.  Van  Vranken,  M.  D.,  West  Troy,  N.  Y. 

(With     anpesthetics,     in     every     instance 
possible.) 
Henry  F.  Kingsley,  M.  D.,  Schoharie,  N.  Y. 
John  C.  Fisher,  M.  D.,  Warsaw,  N.  Y. 
Arthur  E.  Tuck,  M.  D.,  Gloversville,  N.  Y. 
E.  W.  Gallup,  M.  D.,  Stamford,  N.  Y. 
C.  C.  Thayer,  M.  D.,  Clifton  Springs,  N.  Y. 
J.  E.  Smith,  M.  D.,  Clyde,  N.  Y. 
Wm.  H.  Hodgman,  M.  D.,  Saratoga,  N.  Y. 
Paris  G.  Clark,  M.  D.,  Unadilla,  N.  Y. 


VIVISECTION    EESTKICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


•45 


T.  D.  Spencer,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

William  E.  Hathaway,  M.  D.,  Honiellsville, 
N.  Y. 

J.  D.  Mitchell,  M.  D.,  Hornellsville,  N.  Y. 

Thomas  B.  Fowler,  M.  D.,  Colioctoii,  N.  Y. 

O.  S.  Martin,  M.  D.,  Salamanca,  N.  Y. 

K.  H.  Lougliran,  M.  D.,  Kingston,  N.  Y. 

J.  L.  Gardiner,  M.  D.,  Bridgehamptou,  N.  Y. 

\V.  Scott  Hicks,  M.  D.,  Bristol,  N.  Y. 

A.  S.  Zabriskie,  M.  D.,  Suffern,  N.  Y. 

W.  B.  Putnam,  M.  D.,  Hoosick  Falls,  N.  Y. 

•  "hiirles  B.  Hawley,  M.  D.,  Gouverneur,  N.  Y. 

J.  H.  Weckel,  M.'d.,  Breakabeen,  N.  Y. 

Samuel  J.  Crockett,  M.D.,  Sandy  Creek,  N.  Y. 

T.  Millspaugh,  M.  D.,  Wallkill,"  N.  Y. 

Ciiarles  E.  ivitbeck,  M.  D.,  Cohoes,  N.  Y. 

Dr.  Edwin  R.  Maxson,  LL.D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

H,  A.  Place,  M.  D.,  Ceres,  N.  Y. 

James  H.  Glass,  M.  D.,    Surgeou-in-cbarge, 
UlicaCity  Hospital,  Ex-President  County 
Medieal  Society,  etc.,  Utica,  N.  Y. :  — 
"  The  full  significance  of  the  last  sentence 
cannot  be  too  strongly  emphasized." 

Charles  G.  Stratton,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

E.  Rainier,  M.  D.,  0=ft'ego,  N.  Y. 

S.  Wright  Hurd,  M.  D.,  Lockport,  N.  Y. 

John  J.  Montgomery,  M.  D.,  Drvden,  N.  Y. 

M.  B.  Folwell,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Clinical  Pro- 
fessor of  Diseases  of  Children,  University 
of  Buffalo,  N.  Y.  ■ 

Gonrge  H.  Noble,  M.  D.,  Cairo,  N.  Y. 

S.  P.  Welles,  M.  D.,  Waterloo,  N.  Y. 

Hansom  Terrj-,  M.  D.,  Ischua,  N.  Y. 

Guy  R.  Cook,  M.  D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

James  Allen,  M.  D.,  Richford,  N.  Y. 

Willard  R.  Fitch,  M.  D.,  Knowlesville,  N.  Y. 

F.  A.  Button,  M.  D.,  Gainesville,  N.  Y. 

(Adds  the  last  clause  of  statement  III.) 

G.  W.  Murdock,  M.  D.,  Cold  Spring,  N.  Y. 
Charles  Forbs,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

G.  W.  Faller,  M.  D.,  Oyster  Bay  N".  Y. 
R.  N.  Cooley,  M,  D.,  Hannibal  Centre,  N.  Y. 
J.  D.  Guy,  M.  D.,  Chenango  Forks.  N.  Y. 
William  B.  Mann,  M.  D.,  Brockport,  N.  Y. 
(Erases  "  in  private.") 

R.  H.  Morey,  M.  D.,  Old  Chatham.  N.  Y. 
W.M.  Hilton,  M.  D.,  Waverly,  N.  Y. 
Fred  A.  Wright,  M.  D.,  Glen  Cove,  N.  Y. 
R.  S.  Prentiss,  M.  D.,  Long  Island  Citj-,  N.Y. 
Donald  McPherson,  M.  D.,  Palmyra,  N.  Y. 
A.  J.  Mixsell,  M.  D.,  Mamaroneck,  N.  Y. 
J.  W.  Huntington,  M.  D.,  Mexico,  N.  Y. 
W.  C.  Earl,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
0.  J.  Hallenbeck,  M.  D.,  President  Ontario 
Co.  Medical  Society,  Canandaigua,  N.  Y. 


M.  W.  Vandenburg,  A.  M.,  M.   D.,  Fort  Ed- 
ward, N.  Y. 
H.  T.  Dana,  M.  D.,  Cortland,  N.  Y. 

F.  A.  Strong,  M.  D.,  Brewerton,  N.  Y. 
Emily  H.  Wells,  M.  D.,  Binghamton,  N.  Y. 
John  E.  Weaver,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
Mrs.  M.  L.  D.  Wilson,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. 
A.  P.  Carsous,  M.  D.,  Forestville,  N.  Y. 
George  V.  R.  xMerrill,  M.  D.,  Elniira,  N.  Y. 
M.  R.  Carson,  M.  D.,  Canandaigua,  N.  Y. 

J.  D.  Featherstonhaugh,  M.  D.,  Cohoes,  N.  Y. 
George  M.  Abbott,  M.  D.,  Castleton,  N.  Y. 
Wallace  Sibley,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
James  M.  Barrett,  M.  D.,  Owego,  N.  Y. 

G.  W.  Seymour,  M.  D.,  Westfield,  N.  Y. 
Theo.  Waiser,  M.  D.,  New  Brighton,  N.  Y. 
Smith  Ely,  M.  D.,  Newburgh,  N.  Y. 
Elizabeth  R.  G.  Myer,  M.  D.,  Turner,  N.  Y. 
Nathan  P.  Tyler,  M.  D.,  New  Rochelle,  N  .Y. 
Marcenos  H.  Cole,  M.  D.,  Newfane,  N.  Y. 
E.  B.  Tefft,  M.  D.,  New  Rochelle,  N.  Y. 

A.  M.  Comfort,  M.  D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Byron  Pierce,  M.  D.,  Coopers  Plains,  N.  Y. 
De  Witt  C.  Jayne,  M.  D.,  Florida,  N.  Y. 
M.  M.  Frye,  M.  D.,  Auburn,  N.  Y. 

E.  T.  Rulison,  M.  D.,  Amsterdam,  N.  Y. 
J.  W.  Gee,  M.  D.,  Van  Etten,  N.  Y. 
Carlos  T.  Miller,  M.  D.,  Mount  Kisco,  N.  Y. 
S.  H.  Freeman,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Thomas  Becket,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y.: 

"  Without  pain." 
Edward  Torrey,  M.  D.,  .\llegany,  N.  Y. 
H.  E.  Allison,  M.  D.,  Medical  Supt.  Mattea- 

wan  State  Hospital,  Fislikill,  N;  Y. 
Henry  C.  Coon,  M.  D.,  Alfred,  N.  Y. 
T.  KiVkland  Perry,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
L.  E.  Rockwell,  M.  D.,  Amenia,  N.  Y. 
J.  R.  Fairbanks,  M.  D.,  Amsterdam,  N.  Y. 
P.  J.  Keegan,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Frederic  C.  Curtis,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Richard  M.  Moore,  M.  1).,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
William  S.  Cheesman,  M.  D.,  Auburn,  N.  Y. 
W.  H.  Procter,  M.  D.,  Binghamton,  N.  Y. 
Clayton  M.  Daniels,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
Stephen  Y.  Howell,  M.  D.  (M.  R.  C.  S.,  Eng- 
land), Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
C.  E.  Heaton,  M.  D.,  Baldwinsville,  N.  Y. 
W.  J.  Nellis,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

B.  11.  Grove,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
Wm.  C.  Phelps,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y.  . 

F.  Findlaj-,  M.  D.,  Franklin ville,  N.  Y." 
James  L.  Cooley.  M.  D.,  Glen  Cove,  N.  Y. 

C.  H.  Masten,  M.  D.,  Sparkill,  N.  Y. 
J.  Harris  Oxner,  M.  D.,  Rome,  N.  Y. 

D.  D.  Drake,  M.  D.,  Johnstown,  N.  Y. 
Thomas  B.  Nichols,  M.  D.,  Plattsburg,N.  Y. 
Charles  R.  Weed,  M.  D.,  Utica,  N.  Y. 


46 


VIVISECTION   EESTRICTED    BY    UTILITY. 


Charles  H.  Langdon,  M.  D.,  Phys.  to  Hudson 
River  State  Hospital,  Poughkeepsie,  N.Y. 
M.  L.  Chambers,  M.  D.,  Port  Jefferson,  N.  Y. 
Alva  D.  Decker,  M.  D.,  Prince  Bay,  N.  Y. 
Paul  D.  Carpenter,  M.  D.,  Pittsford,  N.  Y. 
E.  W.  Capron,  M.  D.,  Lansingburgli,  N.  Y. 
Orson  G.  Dibble,  M.  D  ,  Ponipey,  N.  Y. 
H.  C.  Hendrick,  M.  D.,  McGrawville,  N.  Y. 
Arthur  B.  Kinne,  M.  D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Edwin  B  irnes,  M.  D.,  Pleasant  Plains,  N.  Y. 

E.  M.  Lyon,  M.  D.,  Plattsburg,  N.  Y. 
John  C.  DuBois,  M.  D.,  Hudson,  N.  Y.:  — 

"If  j)ossible,  without  causing  pain." 

Valentine  Browne,  M.  D.,  Yonkers,  N.  Y. 

D.  V.  Still,  M.  D.,  Johnstown,  N.  Y. 
T.  H.  Cox,  M.  D.,  Lee  Centre,  N.  Y. 
Lucius  B.  Parmele,  M.  D.,  Batavia,  N.  Y. 
Lyman  Barton,  M.  D.,  Willsboro,  N.  Y. 
e'  Howe  Davis,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 
Cordelia  A.  Greene,  M.  D.,  Castile,  N.  Y. 
A.  C.  Grover,  M.  D.,  Port  Henry,  N.  Y. 
Albert  W.  Palmer,  M.  D.,  Marlborough,  N.  Y. 
Randall  Williams,  M.  D.,  Ex-President  of  the 

Genesee  Co.  Med.  Society,  Le  Ro}',  N.  Y. 

F.  G.  Osborne,  M.  D..  South  Wales,  N.  Y. 
S.  Walter  Scott,  M.  D.,  Troy.  N.  Y. 

F.  P.  Beard,  M.  D.,  CobleskiU,  N.  Y. 
J.  K.  Stockwell,  M.  D.,  Oswego,  N.  Y. 

E.  A.  Chapman,  M.  D.,  Belleville,  N.  Y,: 
"  Without  pain,  when  possible." 

J.  Erwin  Reed,  M.  D  ,  Carmel,  N.  Y. 
Henry  Sperbeck,  M.  D.,  Charlotteville,  N.  Y. 
E.  W.  Earle,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

0.  W.  Peck,  M.  D.,  Oneonta,  N.  Y. 
Seldnn  J.  Mudge,  M.  D.,  Clean,  N.  Y. 
J.  G.  Russell,  M.  D.,  Salem,  N.  Y. 
Osman  F.  Kinlock,  M.  D.,  Troy.  N.  Y. 

J.  Seward  White,  M.  D.,  Glen  Falls,  N.  Y. 
Charles  G.  Bacon,  M.  D.,  Fulton,  N.  Y. 
John  J.  Walsh,  M.  D.,  Buffalo.  N.  Y. 
D.  A.  Barnum,  M.  D.,  Cassville,  N.  Y. 

1.  G.  Johnson,  M.  D.,  Greenfield  Centre,  N.  Y. 
^ J   V.  D.  Coon,  M.  D.,  Clean,  N.  Y. 

J.  H.  Wiggins,  M.  D.,  Jamestown,  N.  Y. 
Newton  F.  Curtis,  M.  D.,  White  Plains,  N.  Y. 
Fremont  W.  Scott,  M.  D.,  Medina,  N.  Y. 
Jerome  H.  Coe,  M.  D.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
L.  T.  White,  M.  D.,  Homer,  N.  Y. 
Geo.  Huntington,  M.  D.,  La  Grangville,  N.  Y. 
H.  P.  Whitford,  M.  D.,  Bridgewater,  N,  Y. 
M.  H.  Bronson,  M.  D.,  Lowville,  N.  Y. 
H.  D.  Weyburn,  M.  D.,  Geneva,  N.  Y. 
S.  J.  Pearsall.  M.  D.,  Saratoga  Springs,  N.  Y. 
John  C.  Sill,  M.  D.,  Argyle,  N.  Y. 
Jacob  L.  Williams,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
(Signs  both  IL  and  III.) 


Eli  H.  Long,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Materia 
Medica  in  Buffalo  College  of  Pharmacy, 
Buffalo,  N.  Y.  '    . 

Francis  Brick,  M.  D.,  Vice-Pres.  Mass.  Surg, 
and  Gynise.  Soc,  Worcester,  Mass. 

O.  J.  Brown,  M.  D.,  North  Adams,  Mass. 

F.  W.  Brigham,  M.  D.,  Shrewsbury,  Mass. 
John  D.  Young,  M.  D.,  Winthrop,  Mass. 

G.  E.  Fuller,  M.  D.,  Monson,  Mass. 

J.  Anson  Bushee,  M.  D.,  Ea^t  Boston,  Mass. 
Locero  J.  Gibbs,  M.  D.,  Chicopee,  Mass. 
W.  P.  M.  Ames,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 
Stephen  W.  Driver,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
James  Peirce,  M.  D.,  Methuen,  Mass. 
John  Dixwell,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

(Questions  the  existence  of  any  exten- 
sive abuse  of  vivisection  in  the  United 
States.) 

J.  A.  Houston,  M.  D.,  Northampton,  Mass. 
Hosea  M.  Quinby,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
Frank  A.  Hubbard,  M.  D.,  Taunton,  Mass.: 
"  Painlessly,  if  possible." 

Julius  Garst,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
L.  J.  Putnam,  M.  D.,  No.  Adams,  Mass. 
Charles  W^  Haddock,  M.  D.,  Beverly,  Mass. 
C.  A.  Wheeler,  M.  D.,  Leominster,  Mass. 
Morgan  L.  Woodruff,  M.  D.,  Pittsfield,  Mass. 
Franz  H.  Krebs,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.:  — 

"The  practice  should   only  be   allowed  to 
Zoologists  of  the  first  rank." 
Fred.  W.  Chapin,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 
0.  W.  Phelps,  M.  D.,  Warren,  Mass. 
T.  Haven  Bearing,  M.  D.,  Braintree,  Mass. 
Alfred  A.  Mackeen.  M.  D.,  Whitman,  Mass. 
George  C.  Osgood,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  Mass. 
Edward  H.  Adams,  M.  D.,  Plymouth,  Mass.: 

"Vivisection   should  also  be  restricted  by 
regard     to     the    liighest    dictates    of 
humanity." 
John  A.  Gordon,  M.  D.,  Quincy,  Mass. 
F.  A.  Rogers,  M.  D.,  Chatham,  Mass. 
S.  W.  Bowen,  M.  D.,  Fall  River,  Mass. 
Geo.  F.  Simpson,  M.  D.,  North  Adams,  Mass. 

(Adds   the   last   three   lines    of    Statement 
IIL) 

Benj.  M.  Burrell,. M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.:  — 
"An  anaesthetic  should  always  be  used,  if 
possible." 
E.  A.  Daniels,  M.D.  (Harvard), Boston,  Mass. 
S.  T.  Hyde,  M.  D.,  Dorchester,  Mass. 
James  L.  Harriman,  M.  D.,  Hudson,  Mass. 
Thomas  Waterman,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Clarence  L.  Hower,  M.  D.,  Hanover,  Mass. 
Frederick    F.    Doggett,    M.  D.    (Harvard), 

Boston,  Mass. 
Dwight  E.  Cone,  M.  D.,  Fall  River,  Mass. 


VIVISECTION   EESTEICTED    BY    UTILITY. 


47 


Emma  L.  Call,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Riifus  K.  Noyes,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
F.  Gordon  Morrill,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Edward  C.  Briggs,  M.  D.  (Assistant  Professor 

of  Materia  Medica,  Harvard  University), 

Boston,  Mass. 

E.  S.  Bolaiid,  M.  D.,  So.  Boston,  Mass. 
Henry  N.  Jones,  M.  D.,  Kingston,  Mass. 
W.  li.  Sylvester,  M.  D.,  Natick,  Mass. 
Henry  M.  Chase,  M.  D.,  Lawrence,  Mass. 
Helen  A.  Goodspeed,  jM.  D.,  Leicester,  Mass. 
.John  H.  Gilbert,  M.  D.,  Quincy,  Mass. 
.James  A.  Dow,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  Muss. 

A.  S.  Osborne,  M.  D.,  Medford,  Mass. 
George  E.  Percy,  M.  D.,  Sale)n,  Mass. 
Wni.  K.  Knowles,  M.  D..  Everett,  Mass.: 
"  This  statement  corresponds  with  my  views. 

Vivisection  should  certainly  be  carefully 

restricted." 
C.  N.  Chamberlain,  M.  D.,  Andover,  Mass.: 
"  AnoBsthesia  should  be  employed  in  every 

case  where  its  use  would  not  defeat  the 

object  of  inquiry." 
S.  L.  Eaton,  M.  D.,  Newton  Highlands,  Mass. 
J.  ,T.  B.  Vermyne,  M.  D.,  New  Bedford,  Mass. 
Charles  Jordan,  M.  D.,  Wakefield,  Mass. 
Lincoln  K.  Stone,  M.  D.,  Newton,  Mass. 
J.  Winthrop  Spooner,  M.  D.,  Hingham,  Mass. 
John  M.  French,  M.  D.,  Milford,  Mass. 
Rollin  C.  Ward,  M.  D.,  Northfield,  Mass. 
Willard  S.  Everett,  M.  D.,  Hyde  Park,  Mass. 
Otis  H.  Johnson,  M.  D.,  Haverhill,  Mass. 
H.  A.  Smith,  M.  D.,  Bondsville,  Mass. 
Edwin  B,  Harvey,  M.  D.,  Westborough,  Mass. 
J.  H.  Robbins,  M.  D.,  Hingham,  Mass. 
(Signs  also  No.  IIL) 

F.  H.  Davenport,  M.  D.,  Instructor  in  Gynaa- 

cology,  Harvard  Medical  School,  Boston, 

jSIass. 
A.  A.  Arthur,  M.  D.,  Marshfield,  Mass. 
J.  A.  Follett,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
John  A.  Lamson,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
James  Dunlap,  M.  D.,  Northampton,  Mass. 
Julia  A.  Marshall,  M.  D.,  Haverhill,  Mass. 

E.  E.  Spencer,  M.  D.,  Cambridgeport,  Mass. 
("has.  W.  Stevens,  M.  D.,  Charlestown,  Mass. 
Nathan  French,  M.  D.,  Maiden,  Mass. 
Leslie  A.  Phillips,  M.  D.,  Berkeley  St.,  Bos- 
ton, Mass. 

S.  F.  Haskins,  M.  U.,  Orange,  Mass.:  — 
"  Would  have  an  anesthetic  used  whenever 
practical." 
Luther  .G.  Chandlf^r,  M.  D.,  Townsend,  Mass. 
J.  K.  Warren,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 

F.  J.  Canedy,  M.  D.,  Shelburne  Falls,  Mass. 
E.  Proctor  Peirce,  M.  D,,  Springfield,  Mass. 
H.  A.  Deane,  M.  D.,  Plasthampton,  Mass. 


C.  M.  Barton,  M.  D.,  Hatfield,  Mass. 

(Adds,  "  and  permitted  only  to  competent 
and  trustworthy  persons.") 

Edwin  A.  Colb}',  M.  D.,  Gardner,  Mass. 

W.  H.  Hildreth,  M.  D.,  Newton  Upper  Falls, 

Mass. 
M.  V.  Pierce,  M.  D.,  Milton,  Mass. 
C.  A.  Allen,  M.  D.,  Holyoke,  Mass.:  — 

"  And  without  pain." 
John  B.  Learned,  M.  D.,  Florence,  Mass.: 

"  And  without  pain." 
C.  C.  Messer,  M.  D.,  Turners  Falls,  Mass. 
C.  G.  Trow,  M.  D.,  Sunderland,  Mat-s. 
C.  Blodgett,  M.  D.,  Holyoke,  Mass.:  — 

"  And  without  pain." 

C.  M.  Wilson,  M.  D.,  Shelburne  Falls,  Mass. 

John  P.  Brown,  M.  D.,  Taunton,  Mass. 

Porter  Hall,  M.  D.,  Leominster,  Mftss. 

John  C.  Irish,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  Mass. 

Thomas  Conant,  M.  D.,  Gloucester,  Mass. 

Mose.s  W.  Kidder,  M.  D.,  Lincoln,  Mass. 

John  W.  Crawford,  M.  D.,  Lawrence,  Mass.: 
"I  would  restrict  vivisection  to  medical 
schools,  and  to  such  professors  of  an- 
atomy and  physiology  (or  medical  stu- 
dents under  their  guidance)  as  may  re- 
ceive license  under  State  supervision." 

P.  Wadsworth,  M.  D.,  Maiden,  Mass.  :  — 
"  Painless,  so  far  as  possible." 

Seraph  Frissell,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 
Henry  J.  Kenj'on.  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass.: 
"  To   all   the   above   I   most   heartily   and 
earnestly  subscribe." 

Wm.  A.  McDonald,  M.  D.,  Lynn,  Ma.ss. 

Daniel  C.  Rose,  M.  D.,  Stoughton,  Mass. 

J.  F.  Adams,  IM.  D..  Worcester,  Mass. 

A.  Carter  Webber,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

S.  A.  Sylvester,  M.  D.,  Newton  Centre,  Mass. 

Orin  Warren,  M.  D.,  West  Newbury,  Mass. 

W.  H.  Tobey,  M.  D..  Boston,  Mass. 

John  H.  Kennealy,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
(Agrees  with  last  clause  of  III.) 

Henry  G.  Preston,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

J.  Lester  Krep,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y'. 

Francis  H.  "Miller,  M.  D.,   Physician  to   St. 
Malachy's  Home,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

John  H.  Trent,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

John  H.  French,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Arthur  Beach,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Frank  Bond,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

J.  Freeman  Atwood,  M.  D.,  Hmoklyn,  N.  Y. 

Benjnmin  Ayres,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

A.  Nelson  Bell,  M.  D.,  Editor  of  "  The  Sani- 
tarian," B;-nok1yn,N.Y. 

Wesley  Sherman,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 


48 


VIVISECTION    RESTRICTED   BY   UTILITY. 


J..L.  Cavdozo,  M.  D.,  D.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. : 
"  As  far  as  possible,  without  causing  pain." 

George  Nichols,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
George  W.  Gushing,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Jesse  B.  Lung,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Henry  F.  Riseh,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
L.  h"  Miller,  M.  D.,A.  M.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.: 
'•  Most  nearly  represents  my  views." 

S.  E.  Stiles,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
GlentworthR.  Butler,  A.  M.,  M,  D.,  Physician 
to  the  M.  K.  Hospital,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
(Favors     vivisection     restricted    only    by 
"  possible,  probable,  or  certain  utility.") 

Eliza  W.  Mosher,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
John  F.  Davis,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
J.  B.  Mattison,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
W.  Armstrong  Fries,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
T.  C.  Giroux,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
J.  G.  Atkinson,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
N.  A.  Robbins,  M.  D.,  Surgeon  of- the  Brook- 
lyn Fire  Department,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. : 
"  V'ivisection    only    allowable    if    without 
pain." 

Benjamin  Edson,  M.  D.,  Brooklvn,  N.  Y.: 
"  With  proper  use  of  anaesthetics." 

G.  Leroy  Menzie,  M.  D.,  Oneida,  N.  Y. 
HowellWhite,  M.  D.,  Fishkill,  N.  Y.:  — 
"  And  without  pain." 

W.  P.  Clothier,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
Geo.  F.  Perry,  M.  D.,  Woodbourne,  N.  Y. 
Mary  Armstrong,  M.  D.,  Jamestown,  N.  Y. 
W.  S.  Webster,  M.  D.,  Liberty,  N.  Y. 
R.  J.  Carroll,  M.  D.,  Red  Hook,  N.  Y. 
Edw.  E.  Brown,  M.  D.,  Glenvilie,  N.  Y. 
C.  R.  Rogers,  M.  D.,  Newark  Valley,  N.  Y. 
James  W.  Putnam,  M.  D.,  Lyons,  N.  Y. 
Amelia  E.  DeNott,  M.  D.,  Syractise,  N.  Y. 
W.  F.  Nutten,  M.  D.,  Newark,  N.  Y. 
Clifford  Hewitt,  M.  D.,  Hoosick  Falls.  N.  Y. 
W.  E.  Whitford.,  M.  D..  Oxbow,  N.  Y. 
M.  M.  Fenner,  M.  D.,  Fredonia,  N.  Y. :  — 
"  Use    of    anfBsthetics,    when    practicable, 
should  be  enjoined.' 

Porter  Farley,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
B.  B.  Bnntecou,  M.  D.,  Troy,  N.  Y. 
E.  V.  Dencll,  M.  D.,  Saratoga  Springs,  N.  Y. 
James  H.  Jackson,  M.  D.,  Dansville,  N.  Y. 
K.  J.  Jackson,  M.  D.,  Dansville,  N.  Y. 
P.  W.  Neefus,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
James  K.  King,  M.  D.,  Watkins,  N.  Y. 
Jefferson  Scales,  INI.  D.,  New  Brighton,  N.  Y. 
Seth  S.  Goldthwaite,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
]j.  S.  Dixon,  M.  D.  (Harvard),  Boston,  Mass. 
T.  M.  Strong,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
John  J.  Shaw,  M.  D.,  Plymouth,  Mass. 


Sanford  Hanscom,  M.D.,E.  SomervilIe,Mass.: 

"  And  without  pain." 
Ernest  N.  Noyes,  M.  D.,  Newburyport,  Mass. 
David  Clark,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 
John  Sanborn,  M.  D.,  Melrose,  Mass. 

B.  F.  Moulton,  M.  D.,  Lawrence,  Mass. 
George  M.  Morse,  M.  D.,  Clinton,  Mass. 

C.  C.  Cundall,  M.  D.,  Fairhaven,  Mass. 
Daniel  Humphrey,  M.  D.,  Lawrence,  Mass. 
Herbert,F.  Pitcher,  M.  D.,  Haverhill,  Mass. 
Wm.  Winslow  Eaton,  M.  D.  (Univ.  of  N.  Y.), 

Dan  vers,  Mass. 

S.  K.  Merrick,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

William  H.  Carpenter,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Benjamin  H.  Hartwell,  M.  D.,  Ayer,  Mass. 

Walter  Channing,  M.  D.,  Brookline,  Mass. 

John  Homer,  M.  D.,  Newburyport,  Mass. 

Wm.  H.  Milliken,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Camille  Cote,  M.  D.,  Marlboro',  Mass. 

Charles  N.  Page,  M.  D.,  Danvers,  Mass. 

Frank  E.  Biuidy,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.:  — 
"And  without  pain,  when  practicable." 

W.  F.  Wesselhoeft,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Elisha  Chenery,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass.:  — 
"  II.  and  III.  should  go  together." 

Wm.  P.  Stutson,  M.  D.,  Cuinmington,  Mass. 

Sarah  Hackett  Stevenson,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

Rachel  H.  Carr,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

Almon  Brooks,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

George  M.  Palmer,  M.  D. 

W.  B.  Lewert,  M.  D.,  San  Francisco,  CaL 

Charles  W.  Stockman,  M.  D.,  Portland,  Me. 

Rev.  Dr.  Wilford  L.  Robbins,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  O.  B.  Frothingham,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  HiratioStebbins,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

Rev.  Dr.  B.  L.  Agnew,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Rev.  R.  Leroy  Lockwood.  Broomtield,  N.  J. 

Rev.  Henry  Blanchard,  Portland,  M'3. 

Rev.  M.  J.  Savage,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  William  Salter,  Burlington,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Charles  F.  Dole,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  K.  Beecher,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Dr.  H.  W.  Thomas,  Chicago,  111.:  — 
"I   favor    this   statement;    but   as   far  as 
possible  vivisection  should  be  painless." 

Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  B.  Angell,  Harrisburg,  Pa. : 
"The  second  statement  most  nearh'  repre- 
sents my  ideas,  although  the  reasons 
advanced  in  the  third  statement  and 
the  limitations  therein  suggested  also 
strongly  appeal  to  me.  Regarding 
vivisection  as  a  method  of  study  in 
some  public  and  private  schools,  I  hold 
the  stj'ongest  opinions;  namely,  that 
such  use  should  be  utterly,  entirely, 
and  definitely  prohibited  under  the 
extremest  penalties." 


VIVISECTION   RESTRICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


49 


Rev.  Dr.  Howard  A.  Johnston,  Chicago,  III. 

Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  C.  Hall,  Chicago,  111. 

Rev.  William  \V.  Jordan,  Clinton,  Mass. 

Rev.  Dr.  Wm.  R.  Richards,  Plainfield,  N.  J.: 
"This  statement  commends  itself  to  my 
judgment.  ...  1  am  sometimes  made 
uneasy  by  what  seems  to  me  a  tendency 
at  present  towards  excessive  control  of 
individual  libert}^  by  law." 

Rev.   Dr.    William    Bryant,    Editor    of    the 

"Michigan  Presbyterian,"  Mt.  Clemens, 

^lichigan:  — 

"  No.  III.  most  nearly  meets  my  views,  but 

I  see  some   points   in   I.  and   II.  with 

which  I  also  agree.     I  question  how  far 

vivisection  is  valuable." 

Rev.  Dr.  J.  De  Hart  Bruen,  Belvidere,  N.  J.: 
"  I  appreciate  the  great  difficulty  in  making 
restrictions  ;  yet  a  reasonable  law,  I  be- 
lieve, could  be  drawn  and  enforced 
which  would  check  abuse,  and  yet  not 
seriously  embarrass  the  search  for  use- 
ful facts." 

Rev.  Alfred  Noon,  Ph.D.,  Boston,  Mass. : 
"  While  on  the  whole  favoring  this  presen- 
tation, I  sign  witii  two  expressions  of 
modification:  1.  The  utility  idea  should 
be  modified  by  the  provision  of  painless- 
ness. 2.  iVm  not  clear  that  the  State  is 
the  best  repository  of  power.  In  many 
communities  the  local  government  could 
enforce  better  than  the  wider  constitu- 
ency." 

Rev.  Charles  H.  Walker,  Lansingburgh,  N.  Y. 
(Adds  final  paragraph  of  statement  II.  to 
this  statement.) 

Rev.  Dr.  William  H.  Davis,  Detroit,  Mich. 

Rev.  H.  L.  Mitchell,  Ph.B.,  Mystic,  Conn.: 
"  While  I  should  be  glad  to  see  all  infliction 
of  unnecessary  suffering  upon  our  dumb 
friends  abolished,  yet  I  think  that  the 
restriction  of  the  practice  of  vivisection 
by  law  is  the  most  practicable  way  to 
diminish  the  evil  at  present." 

Rev.  Dr.  Edward  B.  Goodwin,  Chicago,  111. : 
'•I  believe  most  heartily  in  the  restrictions 
indicated  under  this  head,  and  I  would 
have  the  law  of  restrictions  most  rig- 
idly applied,  and  its  penalties  rigidly 
enforced." 

Rev.  Dr.  Isaac  J.  Lansing,  Boston,  Mass.: 
"  I  favor  this,  with  a  leaning  toward  No.  I. 
It  is  solely  a  question  whether  men  can 
be  saved  from  suffering  by  inflicting 
the  least  possible  suffering  on  lower 
creatures." 


Rev.  Dr.  W.  M.  Paden,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Rev.  Dr.  T.  Komeyn  Beck,  Oakland,  Cal. 
Rev.  Dr.  George  M.  Steele,  LL.D.,  Ex-Pres. 
Lawrence  University,  Auburndale,  Mass. 
Rev.  Dr.  Rufus  A.  White,  Chicago.  III.:  — 
"This  my  judgment  signs;  my  sympathies 
sign  the  first." 

Rev.  Dr.  John  McCiellan  Holmes:  — 

"  I  am  disposed  to  annex  to  this  statement 
the  views  expressed  in  No.  II." 

Rev.  John  W.  Chadwick,  Brookh'n,  N.  Y. : 
"  I  heartily  approve  of  at  least  so  much  re- 
striction as  is  here  indicated." 

Rev.  Dr.  E.  Winchester  Donald,  Boston,  Mass : 
"  Permission  to  practise  vivisection  should 
be  granted  only  by  a  license  issued  by 
a  competent  hoard.  Vivisection  with- 
out such  a  license  should  be  made  a 
punishable  offence." 

Rev.  Dr.  John  Henry  Burrows,  Chicago,  111. 
(Dr.  Burrows  would  make  the  seventh  line 
stronger  by  inserting  "  very  narrow  " 
before  the  word  "  limitations.") 

Rev.  Dr.  Thaddeus  A.  Snively,  Chicago,  III. 
Rev.  J.  E.  Roberts,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 
Rev.  Wm.  H.  Clark,  Bay  City,  Mich. :  — 

"  Without  pain  whenever  possible." 
Rev.  S.  B.  Alderson,  D.  D.,  Topeka,  Kan. 

(Erases  last  two  paragraphs.) 

Rev.  Marcus  N.  Preston,  Bath,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  L.  H.  Hallock.  D.  D.,  Tacoma,  Wash. 

Rev.  S.  H.  Cobb,  Richfield  Springs,  N.Y. .. 

Rev.  V.  L.  Lockwood,  D.  D.,  Bloomfield,  N.J. 

Rev.  Joseph  Osgood,  Cohasset,  Mass. 

Rev.  Louis  C.  Washburn,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Samuel  C.  Palmer,  St.  Louis,  ^lo. 

Rev.  A.  A.  Kiehle,  D.  D.,  Milwaukee,  Wis. 

Rev  J.  M.  Seymour,  Norwalk,  Ohio. 

Rev.  L.  R.  Dalrymple,  Reading,  Pa. 

Rev.  Arthur  C.  Powell,  Baltimore.  iMd. 

Rev.  D.  W.  Coxe,  Archdeacon  of  Scranton,  Pa. 

Rev.  S.  W.  Derby,  Rockville,  Conn. 

Rev.  C.  P.  Anderson,  Oak  Park,  III. 

Rev.  Frederick  L.  Hosmer,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Rev.  William  B.  Clark,  Seneca  Falls,  N.  Y.  : 
"Utilit}''  to  be  unquestionable,  and  vivisec- 
tion   to    be   without    pain    so    far    as 
possible." 

Rev.  I.  W.  Hathaway,  D.  D.,  Jersey  City,  N.  J. 
Rev.  Fred  T.  Ronse,  Plantsville,  Ct. 
Rev.  John  Rouse,  M.  A.  (Oxon.),  Chicago,  111. 
Rev.  Edward  Abbott,  D.  D.,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
Rev.  Henry  H.  Stfbbins,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Cornelius  W.  ISInrrow,  Norwich,  Conn. 
Rev.  James  W.  Cooper,  New  Britain,  Conn. 


50 


VIVISECTION    KESTRICTED    BY    UTILITY. 


Rev.  John  Acwnrth,  New  York  City. 

Kev.  Walter  M.  Barrows,  D.  D.,  Rockford,  111. 

Rev.  Charles.  Townsend,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Henry  L.  Jones,  Wilkesbarre,  Pa. 

Rev.  Thomas  L  Cole,  Portland,  Oregon. 

Rev.  Arthur  L.  Williams,  Chicago,  111. 

Rev.   W.   R.    Huntington,  D.  D.,  Rector  of 

Grace  Church,  New  York  City. 
Rev.  C.  D.  W.  Bridgman,  New  York  City. 
Rev.  W.  J.  Petrie,  Chicagi),  111. 
Rev.  Edwin  P.  Thomson,  Springfield,  Ohio. 
Kev.  Judson  Titsworth,  Milwaukee,  Wis. 
Rev.  Frank  Russell,  Bridgeport,  Conn. 
Rev.  C.  S.  Nickerson',  Racine,  Wis. 
Rev.  Albert  W.  Ryan,  Diiluth,  Mich. 
Rev.  Samuel  B.  Stewart,  Lynn,  Mass. 

(Erases  last  line  but  one,   and  inserts  the 

stronger    phraseology    of    the    last   four 

lines  of  II.) 

Rev.  Clinton  Douglas,  Des  Moines,  Iowa. 
Rev.  S.  C.  Beach,  Bangor,  Me. 
Rev.  Austin  B.  Bassett,  B.  D.,  Ware,  Mass. 
Rev.  James  McLeod,  D.  D.,  Scrauton,  Pa. 
Rev.  Percy  Browne,  Boston,  Mass. 
Rev.  Arthur  W.  Little,  D.  D.,  Evanston,  111. 
Rev.  J.  L.  Parks,  S.  T.  D.,  Pi^iladelphia,  Pa. 
Rev.  C.  H.  Hamlin,  Easthampton,  Mass. 
Rev.  Theo.  B.  Foster,  Pawtucket,  R.  I. 
Rev.  P.  N.  Meade,  Oswego,  N.  Y. 
Itev.  Calviu  M.  Clark,  Haverhill,  Mass. 
Rev.  Edward  C.  Ewing,  Danvers,  Mass. 
Rev.  Leon  P   Marshall,  Franklin,  Ind. 
Rev.  James  M.  Patterson,  Detroit,  Mich. 
Rev.  William  W.  Kno.x,  D.  D.,  New  Bruns- 
wick, N.  J. :  — 
"With  the  least  possible  pain." 

Rev.  Irving  W.  Metcalf,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 
Rev.  Frederick  AL  Kerkees.  Meadville,  Pa. 
Rev.  Henry  H.  Sleeper,  Ph.D.,  Elizabeth,  N.J. 
Rev.  D.  A.  Newton,  Winchester.  Mass. 
Rev.  George  F.  Smythe.  ]\Iount  Vernon,  Ohio. 
Rev.  (t.  a.  Alcott.  M.  A..  Danielsonville,  Ct. 
Rev.     Edward    ISIcArthur    Noyes,     Newton 

Centre,  ]Mass. 
Rpv.  James  H.  Van  Buren,  Lynn,  iSInss. 
Rev.  Emery  H.  Porter,  Newport,  R.  I. 
Rev.  John  H.  Egar,  D.  D.,  Rome,  X.  Y. 
Rev.  John  II.  Griffith,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  H.  S.  Rablee,  Charlotte,  Mich. 
Rev.  Russell  T.  Hall,  Greenwich,  Conn. 
Rev.  M.  D.  Edv.-ards,  D.  D..  St.  Paul,  Minn. 
Rev.  J.  Spencer  Voorhees,  M.  A.,  West  Win- 

sted,  Conn. 
Rev.  S.  M.  Crothers,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
Rev.  Raymond  H.  Stearns,  Bainbridge,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  John  P.  Peters,  New  York  City. 
Rev.. Thomas  H.  Sill,  New  York  City. 


Rev.  Joseph  Gambee,  Plattsburgh,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  D.  L.  Sanford,  Bellows  Falls,  Vt. 
Rev.  B.  W.  Lockhart,  Manchester,  N.  H. 
Rev.  W.  L.  Phillips,  D.  D.,  New  Haven,  Conn. 
Rev.  George  A.  Paull,  Bloomfield,  N.  J. 

(Adds  last  clause  of  II.) 
Rev.  Frederick  Gibson,  D.  D.,  Baltimore,  Md. 
Rev.  William  Lloyd  Himes,  Concord,  N.  H. 
Rev.  Charles  Herr,  S.  T.  D.,  Jersey  City,  N.  J. 
Rev.  Albert  M.  Hilliker,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Rev.  G.  S.  Mott,  D.  D.,  Flemington,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  William  Ballon,  Fargo,  N.  D. 
Rev.  J.  R.  Collier,  Louisville,  Ky. 
Rev.  Andrew  C.  Browne,  Peoria,  111. 
Rev.  George  E.  Martin,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 
Rev.  Caroline  J.  Bartlett,  Kalamazoo,  Mich. 
Rev.    William    Dallmann     (Editor    of    the 

"  Lutheran  Witness  "),  Baltimore,  Md. 
Rev.  David  Magie,  Paterson,  N.  J. 
Rev.  Charles  T.^  Haley,  D.  D  ,  Newark,  N.  J. 
Rev.'  A.  Gosman,  Lawrenceville :  — 

"  But  practised  only  by  scientific  men  and 
for  clearly  scientific  ends." 
Rev.  Wayland  Spaulding,  Poughkeepsie,  N. Y. 
Rev.  George  O.  Little,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Rev.  T.  J.  Lamont,  M.  A.,  Olympia,  Wash. 
Rev.  W.  F.  Paddock,  D.  D.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Kev.  Dr.  J.  A.  Pollock,  Lebanon,  Ind. 
Rev.  W.  E.  Allen,  Sherburne,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Wm.  R.  Mulford,  New  Haven,  Conn. 
Rev.  William  R.  Campbell,  Roxburv,  Mass. 
Rev.  Christopher  G.  Hazard,  Catskill,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Amos  Skeele,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  E.  L.  House,  S.  T.  B.,  Altleboro,  Mass. 
Rev.  A.  McCullngh,  D.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
Rev.  Willard  B.  Thorp.  Binghamton,  N.  Y. 
Rev.  Robert  E.  Ely,  Cambridgeport,  Mass. 
Rabbi  Abraham  R.  Levy,  B.  Ph.,  Chicago,  111. 
Rev.  James  Roberts.  D.  D.,  Colwyn,  Pa. 
(Accepts  II.  as  best  expression  of  his  views 
while    not    endorsing   its    entire  phrase- 
olo?y.) 
Rev.  Dr.  A.  S.  Fiske,  Ithaca,  N.  Y.:  — 

'•I  believe  this  practice  should  be  regulated 
by  intelligent  laws,  restricted  to  com- 
petent and  authorized  persons  and  fit 
phices,  and  conducted  solely  in  the  in- 
terests of  relief  to  human  pains  and 
diseases." 
Rev.  Fred.  E.  Dewhurst,  Indianapolis.  Ind. 
Rev.  George  Hutchinson  Smith,  D.  D.,  East 

Orange,  N.  J. 
Rev.  Samuel  Cedsall,  Chicago,  111. 
Rev.  Dr.  John  Acworth,  New  York  City. 
Rev.  Clifford  W.  Barnes,  R.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 
Rev.  Dr.  Edmund  Q.  S.  Osgood,  B.  D.,  Hyde 
Park,  Mass. 


VIVISECTION   RESTKICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


51 


Rev.  Dr.  Myron  Adams,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Nathaniel  Seaver,  Jr.,  Leicester,  Mass.: 
"I  would  confine  vivisection  to  medical  and 
scientific  scliools,  and  proliibit  it  else- 
where altogether,  especially  in  presence 
of  minors." 

Rev.  A  S.  Garver,  D.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 

Rev.  T.  M.  Hodgdoii,  West  Hartford,  Conn. : 
"  Vivisection  should  be  without  pain  so  far 
as  possible." 

Rev.  Dr.  Wm.  A.  Keese,  Lawrence,  Mass.: 
"  I  am  by  no  means  sure  but  that  the  first 
statement  is  correct;  yet  not  having 
special  knowledge  on  the  subject,  I 
incline  to  the  more  conservative  opin- 
ions of  this  statement." 

Rev.  Dr.  C.  E.  S.  Rasay,  Carthage,  N.  Y. :  . 
"  I  should  favor  absolute  prohibition  of 
vivisection  did  I  not  think  that  there 
are  times  when  its  practice  results  in 
good  so  great  as  to  justif}'  the  sacrifice 
of  the  animal.  Undoubtedly  these  cases 
are  rare,  and  restrictions  should  be  made 
even  stronger  than  indicated  above."' 

Rev.  Dr.  T.  T.  Munger,  New  Haven,  Conn.: 
"Vivisection  should  'be  under  strict  and 
careful  supervision,  but  with  a  leaning 
to  No.  IL  I  would  confine  it  to  experts 
for  the  sake  of  di^^covery,  and  shut  it 
out  as  means  of  demonstrating  estab- 
lished facts." 

Rev.  Wm.  C.  Stiles,  D.  D.,  Jackson,  Mich.: 
"  Vivisection  should  always  be  without  pain 
when  anaesthetics  do  not  prevent  the 
experiment." 

Rev.  .Joseph  J.  Woolley,  Pawtucket,  R.  I. 

Rev.  John  G.. Davenport,  S.  T.  D.,  Water- 
burj',  Conn. 

Francis  Ellingwood  Abbott,  Ph.D.,  Cam- 
bridge, Mass. :  — 
'■  The  above  statement  comes  the  nearest 
to  expressing  my  views  on  the  subject, 
but  I  object  strongly  to  the  word  '  util- 
ity.' Vivisection  is  a  human  action,  a 
part  of  conduct,  and  all  conduct  must 
be  governed  by  ethical  principle,  not 
mere  calculation  of  consequences.  Vivi- 
section, if  really  conducive  to  knowl- 
edge (of  which  I  am  no  judge),  may  be 
prompted  by  motives  of  the  purest 
moral  character,  by  the  purpose  of  in- 
flicting some  pain  to  prevent  greater 
pain,  as  in  surgical  or  dental  operations. 
Only  as  a  means  to  mercy  and  ultimate 
diminution  of  suffering  ought  vivisec- 
tion to  be  tolerated." 


Rev.  S.  J.  Smith,  Ph.D.,  St.  Paul,  Minn. 

Rev.  George  T.  Linsley,  Newtown,  Conn. 

Rev.  H.  R.  Lockwood,  S.  T.  D.,  Syracuse,N.Y. 

Rev.  E.  C.  Murra}-,  D.  D.,  Clinton,  S.  C. 

Rev.  A.  C.  Kimber,  S.  T.  D.,  New  York  City. 

Rev.  Sam'l  Scoville,  D.  D.,  Stamford,  Conn.: 
"  With  a  very  strong  leaning  toward  No.  II. 
and  looking  for  the  time  when  No.  I. 
shall  be  the  law." 

Rev.  Barton  O.  Aylesworth,  LL.D.,  President 
of  Drake  University,  Des  Moines,  Iowa. 

Edwin  L.  Godkin,  Editor  of  "The  Nation," 
New  York  City. 

W.  J.  Rolfe,  Ph.D.,  Ed'itor  and  Author,  Cam- 
bridge, Mass. 

Carlos  Martyn,  LL.D.,  Editor,  Chicago,  111. 

F.  B.  Sanborn,  Journalist,  Concord,  Mass. 
Hjalmar  H.    Boyesen,    Author;  Professor  at 

Columbia  College,  New  York. 
Nathan  H.  Dole,  Literarian,  Boston,  Mass.: 
"Under   only    the  most   stringent  restric- 
tions! " 

G.  W.  Turner,  Editor,  New  York  City. 
Geo.  Wm.  Winterburn,  M.  D.,  Editor,  New 

York  City. 

A.  Ludlow  White,  Editor,  New  York  City. 

W.  C.  Dunn,  Editor,  New  York  City. 

John  Y.  Foster,  Editor,  New  York  City. 

E.  J.  Wheeler,  A.  M.,  Editor.'New  York  City. 

Sam'l  T.  Pickard,  Editor,  Portland,  Me. 

H.  L.  Hastings,  Editor,  Boston,  Mass. 

E.  F.  Hartshorne,  Editor,  Boston,  Mass. 

A.  W.  Stevens,  Editor,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

Louise  M.  Hodgkins,  Editor,  Boston,  Mass. 

Ernest  E.  Russell,  Editor,  New  York  City. : 
"  No  experiments  involving  pain  should  be 
permitted  in  the  class-room.  Cases  are 
conceivable,  however,  where  such  ex- 
periments may  be  justified,  if  conducted 
as  humanely  as  possible,  and  with  due 
sense  of  the  grave  responsibility  as- 
sumed by  the  investigator,  and  of  his 
moral  obligation  to  restrict  the  suffer- 
ing of  the  creature  experimented  upon 
within  the  narrowest  bounds  consist- 
ent with  the  attainment  of  the  object 
sought." 

Albert  G.  Roynton,  Editor,  Detroit,  Mich. 

Amos  R.  Wells,  Editor,  Boston,  Mass. 

Ernest  R.  Willard,  Editor,  Rochester',  N.  Y. 

John  Lemley,  Editor,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

Henry  Abbott  Steele,  Editor,  Newark,  N.  J. 

James  H.  Potts,  Editor,  Detroit,  Mich. 

Stephen  Quinon,  Journalist,  Pittsburg,  Pa. 

T.  J.  Keenan,  Jr.,  Editor,  Pittsburg,  Pa. 

Frank  Kasson,  Editor  of  "Education," 
Boston,  Mass. 


52 


VIVISECTION    KESTRICTED    BY    UTILITY. 


R.  S.  Thompson,  Editor,  Springfield,  Ohio. 

C.  A.  Clardy,  M.  D.,  Nevvstead,  Ky. 

Gov.  Wni.  A.  Richards,  Cheyenne,  W^vo. 

Gov.  J.  M.  Stone,  Jackson,  Miss. 

Gov.  Claude  Mathews,  Indiana. 

Gov.  D.  Russell  Brown,  Providence,  R.  I. 

Gov.  John  Gary  Evans,  Columbia,  S.  C. 

Hon.  J.  A.  T.  Hull,  M.  C,  Des  Moines,  Iowa. 

Hon.  J.  T.  M.  Cleary,  M.  C,  Mankato,Minn. 

Hon.  R.  W.  Tayler,  M.  C,  New  Lisbon,  Ohio. 

Hon.  Alex.  M.  Hardy,  M.  C,  Washington. 

Hon.  Matthew  Griswold,  M.  C,  Erie,  Pa. 

Hon.  F.  C.  Layton,  M.  C,  Wapakoneta,  Ohio. 

Hon.  C.  N.  Fowler,  M.  C,  Elizabeth,  N.  J. 

George  C.  Holt,  Esq.,  New  York  City:  — 
"  The  law  should  defiue  the  general  classes 
of  cases  in  which  vivisection  should  be 
allowed,  and  medical  officials  should 
issue  a  license  in  advance  for  the  pro- 
posed experiments,  clearly  fixing  the 
nature  of  them." 


Hon.  C.  F.  Buck,  M.  C  ,  New  Orleans,  La.: 
"Regulation  should  be  universal;  the  civil- 
ized countries  should  unite  action." 
F.  R.  Coudert,  Esq.,  New  York  City. 
Hon.  Biuger  H.  Hermann,  M.  C,  Washing- 
ton, D.  C. 
James  R.  Howe,  M.  C,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Hon.  Frank  M.  Eddy,  M.  C,  Glenwood,  Minn. 
Hon.  W.  C.  Owens,  M.  C,  Georgetown,  Ky. 
Hon.  Charles  A.  Towne,  M.C.  (Ph.B.),  Du- 

luth,  Minn. 
Hon.  W.  M.  Denny,  M.  C,  Scranton,  Miss. 
Hon.  H.  M.  Baker,  M.  C,  Bow  Mills,  N.  H. 
Hon  E.' J.  Murphy,  M.  C,  East  St.  Louis,  HI- 
Hon.  W.  K.  Ellis,  M.  C,  Heppner,  Ore. 
Hon.  I.  P.  Wanger,  M.  C,  Norristown,  Pa. 
Hon.  A.  B.Wright.  M.C, North  Adams.Mass, 
Rev.  William  M.  Salter,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
B.  De  Witt,  M.  D.,  Oswego,  N.  Y. 
George  E.  Mucuen,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Henry  W.  Boorn,  M.  D.,  Schenevus,  N.  Y. 


2.    Signers  accepting  the  main  Propositions,  but  altering  Phraseology. 

Charles  Eliot  ISTokton,  LL.  D.,  Harvard  University,  Cambridge, 
Mass. 

John  H.   Gladstone,  D.  Sc,  F.  R.  S.,  London,  England. 
Asaph  Hall,  Jr.,  Professor  of  Astronomy,  University  of  Michigan, 
Ann  Arbor. 

C.  R.  Van  Hise,  Professor  of  Geology,  University  of  Wisconsin, 
Madison  :  — 

(Signs  last  two  paragraphs.)  "  It  is  not  wise  to  mal^e  restrictions  based 
upon  known  utility." 

Eev.  John  J.  McCook,  Trinity  College,  Hartford,  Conn.  :  — 

"  There  are  not  probably  many  men  who  would  conduct  experiments 
involving  pain  or  loss  of  Ufe  without  using  an  anaesthetic,  unless  there  were 
some  real  and  convincing  necessity  ;  and  yet  I  have  witnessed  some.  I  fea,r 
it  is  a  fact  that  vivisection  inevitably  tends  to  make  the  conscience  of  the 
operator  a  trifle  too  easy  in  regard  to  the  whole  matter.  Restraint  ought  to 
be  carefully  limited,  however." 

Prof.  A.  D.  F.  Hamlin,  Columbia  College,  New  York  City. 
Prof.  D.  Bodlight,  North  Western  University,  Evanston,  111. 
EossiTER  W.  Eaymond,  New  York  City. 

Sir  Joseph  Fayrer,  M.  D.,  K.  C.  S.  I.,  Surgeon  General,  London  : 
(Sir  eT.  Fayrer  strikes  out  several  words  and  clauses,   particularly  the 
references  to  ]\Iagendie  and  Mantagazza.     He  leaves,  however,  the  follow- 
lowing  sentences  intact  -.) 

"  We  regard  as  cruel  and  wrong  the  infliction  of  torment  upon  animals 
in  the  search  for  physiological  facts  which  have  no  conceivable  relation  to  the 


VIVISECTION   RESTRICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


53 


treatment  of  human  diseases.  .  .  .  We  consider  as  wholly  unjustifiable  the 
practice  of  subjecting  animals  to  torture  in  the  laboratory  or  class-room 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  demonstrating  well-known  and  accepted  facts. 
.   .   .  Such  experiments  as  these  are  degrading  in  tendency." 

(Reference  is  often  made  to  Sir  J.  Fayrer's  numerous  experiments  in 
India  on  snake-poison ;  and  his  indorsement  of  the  foregoing  paragraphs  is 
the  more  striking  as  coming  fi-om  one  of  the  leading  experimenters.) 

IMalcolm    McLean,   M.  D.,   Surgeou-in-charge,  St.   Andrew's   In- 
firmary, New  York  City  :  — 

"...  Vivisection  should  be  limited  to  actual  necessity  of  such  research, 
and  not  be  so  generally  practised  for  demonstration  only." 

Hon.  SiMEOx  E.  Baldwin,  New  Haven,  Conn. :  — 
"  Restricted  by  utility  and  humanity." 

Prof.  E.  I.  James,  University  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
A.  T.  Bristow,  M.  D.,  Surgeon  at  the  Long  Island  College  Hospital, 
Brooklyn,  N.  Y.  :  — 

"It  is  unfair  to  Science  to  ask  her  in  all  cases  to  state  what  she  expects 
to  prove  by  a  given  line  of  experimentation.  Often,  we  can  only  'try  and 
see.'  Nor  can  one  state  that  any  particular  physiological  fact  will  never  bear 
some  relation  to  the  treatment  of  disease.  I  am  entirely  ia  accord  with  the 
third  paragraph." 


Jerome  Walker,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Herbert  F.  Williams,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Robert  T.  Edes,  M.  D.  (formerly  Professor  at 

the  Harvard  Medical  School),   Saratoga, 

New  York. 
Lewis  O.  Goetchius,  M.  D.,  Saratoga,  N.  Y. 
Julius  J.  Kempe,  M.  D.,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
W.  0.  Stillman,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
C.  E.  Stebbins,  M.  D.,  .Morris,  N.  Y. 
E.  G.  Inlay,  M.  D.,  Saratoga  Springs,  N.  Y. 
G.  W.  Sargent,  M.  D.,  Seneca  Castle,  N.  Y. 
Wm.  C.  Nay,  M.  D.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 
Wm.  More  Decker,  M.  D.,  Kingston,  N.  Y. 
Chas.  IT.  Perry,  M.  D.,  Oneida,  N.  Y. 
Jos.  Hasbrouck,  M.  D.,  Dobbs  Ferry,  N.  Y. 

(Apparently  signs  only  last  paragraph.) 
J.  A.   Irwin,   M.  A.   (Cantab.),    M.  D.,  New 

York  City. 
John  Cabot,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Alex.  W.  Stein,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
George  G.  Needham,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Wm.  A.  Valentine,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
H.  J.  Garrigues,  M.  D..  New  York  City. 
John  W.  Elliot,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Sa'ome  Merritt,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
E.  W.  Gushing,  JL  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Henry  C.  Angell.  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
R.  C.  Macdonald,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
W.  Thornton  Parker,  M.  D.,  Groveland,  Mass. 


Wm.  0.  Faxon,  M.  D.,  Stoughton,  Mass. 

D.  W.  Vanderbergh,  M.  D,,  Fall  River, Mass. 

E.  B.  Cutler,  M.  D.,  Waltham,  Mass. 
J.  N.  Danforth,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 

G.  H.  Parkhurst,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.: 
"  Utility  alone  cannot  give  Science  her 
authority,  and  that  utility  which  would 
demonstrnte  that  which  we  have  already 
repeatedly  demonstrated  should  be  ex- 
cluded. Neither  should  the  infliction  of 
pain  be  permitted.  Vivisection  should 
be  permitted  to  competent  and  trust- 
worthy persons,  and  restricted  to 
licensed  j>lnces  which  shall  be  open  at 
all  times  to  inspection  by  agents  of 
humane  societies,  by  members  of  the 
medical  profession,  or  bv  officers  dulv 
appointed  or  empowered  by  law." 

Susan  E.  Crocker,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Joseph  P.  Paine,  M.  D.,  Roxbury,  Mass. 
(Erases    "to     determine    action    of    new 
remedies.") 

C.  E.  Banks.  M.  D.,  Vineyard  Haven,  Mass.: 
"  I  sign  this  without  adopting  all  the  lan- 
guage or  sentiment  of  it.  ...  I  agree 
to  the  desirability  of  prohibiting  the 
demonstration  of  well-known  physio- 
logical facts  before  classes." 


54 


VIVISECTION    RESTEICTED   BY   UTILITY. 


Francis  E.  Corey,  M.  D.,  Westboro,  Mass. 

(Erases  lines  13-14,  as  to  degrees  of  pain.) 
Sam.  B.  Woodward,  M.  D.,  Worcester,  Mass. 
J.  H.  Hobart  Burge,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.: 
"  The  above  statement  is  a  fair  presentation 
of  my   personal    views."     (Dr.   Burge 
erases   tlie   word  "common"  in  nine- 
teenth line.) 
George  C.  Webber,  M.  U.,  Millburj',  Mass.: 
"  I  think  it  quite  impossible  to  say  that  any 
phN'siological  f;\ctean  have  '  no  relation 
to  the  treatment  of  human  diseases.'  " 
J.  T.  G.  Nichols,  M.  D.,  Cambridge,  Mhss. 
James  T.  Walker,  M.  D.,  Falmouth,  Mass. 

(Erases  4th  line  to  "  necessity-.") 
Mary  A.  Mixer,  M.  D,,  Chicago,  111. 

(Erases  lines  13-14,  as  to  degrees  of  pain.) 
Thomas  W.  Busche,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Prof.  Francis  Valk,  M.  D.,N.  Y.  Postgraduate 

College,  N.  Y.    . 
J.  N.  Wright,  1\I.  D.,  Grand  Gorge,  N.  Y. 
(He  says  of  paragrapli  III.  referring  to  pain- 
ful   demonstrations,    "  Especialh'   good. 
Too  much  of  this  is  done.'') 
William  F.  Dudley,  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
(Dr.   Dudley  would  strike    out    paragraph 
referring  to  instantaneous  death  and  the 
clause  which  follows.) 
Lt.-Col.  Alfred  A.  AVoodluill.  "SI.  D.,  LL.D., 
Deputy  Surgeon-General,  U.  S.  A. 
(Col.  Woodhull   erases   references   to   Ma- 
gendie    and    Mantagazza    and    a     large 
number  of  single  words  wjiicii  appear  to 
him  superfluous.     He  indorses,  liowever, 
the  statements  condemning  repetition  of 
painful    experiments    for    demonstration 
and  favoring  legal  restrictions.) 
Prof.  Joseph  Ransohoff,  M.  D.,  F.  R.  C.  S., 
Professor  of  Surgery,  Medical  College  of 
Ohio,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 
(Erases    first   sentence  of   third    paragraph 
and  adds  "except  under  anesthesia.") 
Prof.  C.  M.  Cary,  Professor  of   Physiology 
Auburn,  Ala. 


Rev.  Hermann  Lebentlial, -Weatliersfield,  Ct.: 

"  With  a  broader  detinition  of  utilit}-." 
William  Morton   Payne,  Associate  Editor  of 
"The  Dial,"  Chicago,  111.:  — 
"  '  Vertebrates  '    should   be  substituted  for 
'  animals  '  throughout.     With  inverte- 
brates     our      sympathies     would    be 
wasted." 
Pres.   Jos.  W.    Mauck,  State   University   of 

South  Dakota,  Vermillion,  S.  D. 
Pres.  Samuel  W.  Boardman,  Maryville  Col- 
lege, Maryville,  Tenn. 
Pres.  George  Sverdrup,  Augsberg  Seminary, 

IMinneapolis,  Minn. 
Rev.  Dr.  W^  H.  Ward,  LL.D.,  Superintending 
liditor  of  "  The  Independent,"  N.  Y.  City. 
H.   K.    Carroll,   LL.D.,   Religious  Editor   of 

"  The  Independent,"'  New  York  City. 
H.  L.  Wayland,  Editor,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
Samuel  Sexton,  M.  D.,  New  York  City  :  — 
"  I  do  not  care  to  indorse  some  parts  of  the 
statement,  but  j'ou  may  classify  me  in  a 
general  way  as  opposed  to  the  abuses  of 
vivisection  as  they  now  exist." 
Rev.  S.  B.  Pond,  Norwalk,  Cona. 
Rev.  S.  W.  Meek,  Peoria,  III. 
Rev.  S.  P.  Wilder,  Janesville,  Wis. 
Rev.  S.  G.  Wood,  Easthampton,  Mass. 
Rev.  W.  G.  Andrews,  D.  D.,  Guilford,  Conn. 
Rev.  Ciiarles  E.  St.  John,  Pittsburg,  Pa.: 
"  Utility    should     include    laboratory   and 
class-work   demonstrations  for  mature 
students,  but  not  before  children." 
Rev.  Dr.  Henrv  Van  Dyke,  New  York  City.- 
(Strikes  out  from  the  middle  of  the  6th  line 
to  the  end  of  the  2(1  paragraph.) 
Rev.  Dr.  W.  P.  Swartz,  W^ilmington,  Del. 
Hon.  Edgar  Wilson,  M.  C,  Boise  City,  Idaho. 
(Erases    line    referring   to    "  instantaneous 
death."     "  In  other  respects  I  indorse 
above  statement.") 
Hon.  Wm.  L.  Terry,  M.  C,  Little  Rock.  Ark. 
(Erases    references   to    Mantagazza ;     lines 
23-2.5  and  part  of  lines  27-28.      "  Should 
be  .  .  .  practise.") 


Those  -w^ho  condemn  Torture,  for  Teaching,  but  do  not  approve  of 
Legislation,  nor  of  any  Impediments  to  Original  Research.  Other 
slight  Changes  in  Phraseology  are  not  infrequent. 


Prof.  James  Law,  F.  R.  C.  V.  S.,  Professor 

of  Veterinary    Science,    Cornell    Univ., 

Ithaca,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  As  regards  the  unnecessary  repetition  of 

painful  physiological  experiment  before 

a  class,  or  even  in  a  laboratory,  to  illus- 


trate a  truth  which  is  already  proved, 
it  can  only  deserve  the  condemnation 
of  any  man  of  humanity.  .  .  .  The  in- 
fliction of  pain  for  the  mere  purpose  of 
demonstration  is,  in  my  opinion,  wholl,v 
unwarranted." 


VIVISECTION    EESTRICTED    BY    UTILITY, 


00 


Prof.  L.  H.  Bailey,  College  of  Agriculture, 
Cornell  University,  N.  Y. :  — 
•'  I  subscribe  to  III.  so  far  as  the  fundamental 
position  is  concerned,  but  do  not  believe 
in  legal  measures  to  control  it.  I  should 
prefer  to  control  it  by  an  agreement 
among  the  leading  educators  of  the 
country.'' 

Dr.  George  Trumbull  Ladd,  Professor  of  Psy- 
chology, Yale  College,  Conn.:  — 

"  This  represents  my  views  mqst  nearly, 
with  the  exception  of  the  last  clause.    I 

*  have  increasingly  little  respect  for  the 
law-makers  of  this  country  on  this  or 
any  similar  subject.  I  should  far  rather 
trust  the  men  who  practise,  vivisection, 
unfeeling  and  brutal  as  many  of  them 
undoubtedly  are." 
S.  Thompson,  Editor  of  the  "  Ciiicago  Even- 
ing Journal,"  Chicago,  111. :  — 

"  In  every  case  the  end  should  justify  tlie 
means,  and  the  experimenter  should  be 
held  to  accountability  whenever  he 
oversteps  what  is  necessary  to  his  search 
after  knowledge.  Nothing  should  be 
forgiven  to  exhibition  or  curiosit3^" 

C.  R.  Williams,  Journalist,  Indianapolis,  Ind. 
Charles  H.  Levermore,  Ph.D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
(Erases  last  seven  lines.) 

Rev.  Willis  J.  Beecher,  Professor  in  Auburn 

Theological  Seminary,  N.  Y. 
Prof.  James  M.  Baldwin,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of 
Psychology,  Princeton  University,  N.  J.: 
"...  The  word  '  utility  '  is  not  to  be  de- 
fined by  popular  opinion."     (Professor 
Baldwin  considers  experimentation  jus- 
tifiable  in   a  variety  of  other  circum- 


stances than  those  named  in  the  state- 
ment ;  "for  example,  one  of  the  subjects 
requiring  extended  experiments  just 
now  is  the  physiological  accompani- 
ments and  effects  of  pain."  But  this 
is  precisely  the  field  in  which  Man- 
tagazza  lias  been  working  and  perform- 
ing tlie  most  atrocious  experiments  with- 
out any  results  of  the  slightest  value.) 

Rev.  R.  W.  Brokaw,  M.  A.,  Springfield,  Mass. 

A.  T.  Cabut,  M.  U.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Morton  H.  Prince,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

J.  G-  Hubbard,  M.  D.,  Holyoke,  Mass. 

Isaac  H.  Stearns,  M.  D.,  Lynn,  Mass. 

Angelo  O.  Squier,  M.  D.,  Springfield,  Mass. 

Edward  P.  Fowler,  M.  D.,  New  Y^ork  City. 

Robert  J.  Wilding,  M.  D.,  Malone,  N.  Y. 

Prof.  F.  B.  Gummere,  Haverford  College,  Pa. : 

"  Surely    not    State   control    through    our 

deplorable     State     legislatures  !      The 

question      involves     intelligence     and 

conscience." 

E.  Fletcher  Ingals,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. 
(Erases  last  paragraph.) 

Prof.  James  Tyson,  M.  D.,  Univ.  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Homer  E.  Smith,  J[.  D.,  Norwich,  N.  Y. : 
"With  these  provisos:  (1)  Prohibited  in 
different  schools ;  (2)  Limited  in  medical 
schools  to  painless  experiments :  (.3)  No 
restriction  whatever  in  laboratories  of 
private  investigators." 

Rev.  Dr.  Cyrus  S.  Bate.s,  Cleveland,  Ohio: 
"I  would  rather  trust  the  final  solution  of 
the    vivisection   question    to  education 
and   moral    elevation    than    to    legis- 
lation." 


Signers   who   apparently  approve   of  certain  Restrictions   of  Vivi- 
section, but  who  do  not  condemn  even  painful  Experiments,  if' 
approved  by  a  Professor. 


Sir  Dyce  Duckworth,  M.  D.,  LLD.,  Lecturer  ! 

at  St.  Bartholomew's  Hosp.,  London,  Eng. 
Prof.  John  M.  Tyler,  Prof,  of  Biology,  Am- 
herst College,  Mass. :  — 
"  Amiesthetics  should   be  employed  v.'hen- 
ever  possible  ;  I  do  not  think  that  they 
can  always  be  employed.      I   heartily 
agree  with  the  closing  paragraph,  that 
vivisection  should  be  controlled  by  the 
law  of  the  State." 
George  Seymour,  M.  D.,  Utica,  N.  Y. 
Rev,  James  Eclls,  D.  D.,  Englewood,  N.  Y. 


Albion  W.  Tourgee,  Ph.D,  LL.D.,  Author, 
Mayville,  N.  Y. : — 
"  I  do  not  think  it  incumbent  on  Science  to 
prove  that  vivisection  is  necessary.  It 
need  not  even  be  necessary  at  all;  if  it 
be  helpful  to  the  student  or  operator. 
then  it  should  be  allowed  under  proper 
restrictions.  ...  I  should  vigorously 
oppose  any  other  restriction  than  that 
of  a  well-guarded  license,"  (Erases  all 
but  last  paragraph  of  the  statement.) 

Rev.  G.  H.  Beard,  Ph.D.,  So.  Norwalk,  Conn. 


56 


VIVISECTION   RESTRICTED    BY   UTILITY. 


H.  H.  Baxter,  M.  D.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

(Considers    painful   experiments  justifiable 

for  demonstration,  if  "  not  extended  to 

gratify  an   idle  or  morbid,  or  .even  a 

scientific,  curiosity.") 

Thomas  M.  L.  Chrystie,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  New 

York  City. 
Prof.  F.  A.  Blackburn,  Univ.  of  Chicago: 
"  I  should  be  inclined  to  favor  a  restriction 
on  persons  rather  than  on  methods,  —  a 
sj'stem  of  licenses  that  would  authorize 
a  medical  professor  to  practise  vivisec- 
tion at  his  own  judgment  as  an  aid  in 


teaching,  but  would  prevent  his  students 
from  experimenting  except  under  his 
direction." 

Edward  P.  Nichols,  A.  M.,  Boston,  Mass. 

P];of.  Charles  Foster  Smith,  Professor  of 
Greek,  University  of  Michigan:  — 
"  I  have  not  much  confidence  in  the  wisdom 
of  a  State  or  even  a  National  Legislature 
in  dealing  with  such  questions."  (As 
to  restriction  or  non-restriction,  he 
would  be  guided  by  the  decision  of 
scientific  men.) 


5.    Those  -whose  Alterations  nullify  the  -whole  Statement. 


Rev.  Arthur  Chase,  B.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. : 
"  To  trust  the  professor  wholly,  unless  there 
seemed  reason  for  distrust,  expresses  to 
ni}^  mind  the  best  policy :  vivisection 
governed  by  the  moral  sense." 

Prof.  C.  M.  Grumbling,  Professor  of  Biology, 
etc.,  Iowa  Weslej'an  University,  Mount 
Pleasant,  Iowa :  — 
"  1  lean  to  the  side  of  freedom  on  the  part  of 
specialists.     He  will  nearlj'  always  ad- 
minister an  anfesthetic  when  operating 
on  the  higher  animals,  unless  the  case 
in  hand  forbids." 

A.  IT.  Carvill,  M.  D.,  Somerville,  Mass. 
Alice  F.  Mills,  M.  D.,  Binghamton,  N.  Y. : 
"  Let   anaesthetics   be  used  whenever  they 
will  not  defeat  the  ends  of  science." 
James  Gerrie,  M.  D..  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. : 
"  Suffering  may  be  necessary  to  make  fact 
clear  to  the  student's  mind." 
Rev.  Dr.  W.  Durant,  Saratoga  Springs,  N.  Y. 
(Dr.  Durant  erases  references  to  JIagendie 
and  Mantagazza,  and  would  permit  vivi- 
section where  there  k  probnhllity  o^hexie- 
fit    and   the    suffering   not    greater   than 
"necessary  to  the  end  in  view.") 
A.  Walter  Suiter,  M.  D.,  Herkimer,  N.  Y. 
James  L.  Turner.  M.  D.,  New  York  City: 
"  The  benefit  of  ocular  demonstrations  is  too 
great  to  be  ignored  for  the  manifestation 
of  mere  sentiment.     Utility  and  neces- 
sity should  be  the  governing  factors  in 
matters  of  this  kind." 
John  C.  Schapps  M.  D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y, 


Prof.  Edward  D.  Cope,  Professor  of  Zoology, 
etc.,  Univ.  of  Pennsylvania. 
(Prof.  Cope  considers  ''  vihoWyjustiJialle  the 
common  practice  in  the  United  States 
of  subjecting  animals  to  torture  for  the 
purpose  of   demonstrating  well-known 
facts,"  etc.     He  would  control  vivisec- 
tion  by   the   faculties    of    the   various 
institutions  of  learning,   wherein  it  is 
practised,  such  as  "  universities,  acade- 
mies of  science,  and  medical  schools." 
They  "  should  grant  licenses  to  practise 
vivisection  to  whomsoever  they  should 
deem  suitable  persons.'") 
Prof.  Amos  G.  Warner,  Econnniics  and  Social 
Science,  Stanford  Univ.,  Cal. 
(Erases  all  but  the  first  sentence  of  the  last 
paragraph.) 
Pres.    George    S.    Burroughs,    D.  D.,   LL.D., 
Wabash  College,  Crawfordsville,  Ind. 
(Dr.  Bun-oughs  does  not   believe    in   State 
control,  nor  in  legal  abolition  of  painful 
experiments.) 
S.  G.  Shank,  M.  D.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
James  L.  Perry,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
H.  A.  C.  Anderson,  M.  D.,  New  York  bit\'. 
A.  A.  Hubbell,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 
Z.  Edwards  Lewis,  JNI.  D.,  New  Rochelle,  N.  Y. 
Edward  T.  Williams,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
A.  Lawrence  Mason,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
O.  T.  WJlsey,  M.  D.,  Amityville,  N.  Y. :  — 
"  I  believe  in  unrestricted   vivisection   by 
scientific  investigators,  duly  licensed." 
George  H.  Weaver,  M.  D.,  Prof,  of  Pathology 
in  Northwestern  Univ.,  Chicago,  111. 


VIVISECTION   WITHOUT   RESTRICTIONS.  57 


IV  (a),  vivisection  without  restrictions. 

Vivisection,  or  experimentation  upon  living  creatures,  must  be 
looked  at  simply  as  a  method  of  studying  the  phenomena  of  Life. 
With  it  morality  has  nothing  to  do.  It  should  be  subject  neither 
to  criticism,  supervision,  nor  restrictions  of  any  kind.  It  may  be 
used  to  any  extent  desired  by  any  experimenter  (no  matter  what 
degree  of  extreme  or  prolonged  pain  it  may  involve)  for  demon- 
stration before  students  of  the  statements  contained  in  their  text- 
books, as  an  aid  to  memory ;  for  confirmation  of  theories ;  for  original 
research;  or  for  any  conceivable  purpose  of  investigation  into  vital 
phenomena.  We  consider  that  sentiment  has  no  place  in  the  phy- 
siological laboratory;  that  animals  have  there  no  "rights"  which 
Man  is  called  upon  to  notice  or  respect;  that  Science  cannot  be 
"cruel"  when  her  sole  purpose  is  to  investigate  or  demonstrate;  that 
it  is  as  great  an  impertinence  for  Religion  or  Morality  to  assume  to 
sit  in  judgment  upon  a  scientific  method,  or  to  dictate  to  physiolo- 
gists limitations  beyond  which  extreme  pain  "  ouglU  not  to  be 
inflicted,"  as  for  Theology  to  tell  the  astronomer  where  in  the  skies 
he  should  not  direct  his  telescope,  or  the  geologist  what  rocks  he 
must  not  break. 

And  finally,  while  we  claim  many  discoveries  of  value  in  the  treat- 
ment of  human  ailments  to  have  been  due  to  experiments  upon 
animals,  yet  even  these  we  regard  as  of  secondary  importance  to  the 
freedom  of  unlimited  re^earcli,  and  the  independence  of  Scieiice  from, 
all  restrictions  or  restraints ,  —  agreeing  largely  with  the  statement  of 
Dr.  Hermann,  Professor  of  Physiology  at  Zurich,  that  "no  true 
investigator  in  his  researches  thinks  of  their  practical  utilization, 
tliat  the  advamcement  of  Knowledfje,  and  not  practical  utility  to 
Medicine,  is  the  true  and  straightforward  object  of  all  Vivisection." 

President  J.  G.  Schurman,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
•President  David  S.  Jordan,  M.  D.,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Stanford  Uni- 
versity, California :  — 

"I  believe  that  any  attempt  to  restrict  vivisection  in  the  hands  of  compe- 
tent men,  properly  fitted  to  act  as  investigators,  would  be  thoroughly 
mischievous  in  its  results.  Nor  do  I  believe  that  any  considerable  amount  of 
wanton  pain  has  ever  been  inflicted  by  men  whose  original  work  as  scientific 
investigators  entitles  them  to  the  name.  On  the  other  hand,  I  greatly  depre- 
cate the  mischief  done  by  persons  who  are  not  investigators,  but  who  imitate 
the  actions  of  these  for  highly  different  purposes.  The  whole  matter  is  one 
for  public  opinion  to  regulate  rather  than  the  State.  I  do  not  find  my  views 
expressed  fully  in  any  one  of  the  four  statements  in  the  circular  ;  but  if  I 
should  sign  any  one  of  the  four  it  would  be  this." 


58  VIVISECTION   WITHOUT    KESTRIGTIONS. 

Prof.  Joseph  Le  Conte,  Professor  of  Geology  and  Natural  History, 
University  of  California,  Berkeley  :  — 

"  I  have  carefully  examined  your  jjropositions  in  regard  to  vivisection, 
and  cannot  fully  endorse  any  of  them ;  but  in  the  present  condition  of  things 
in  this  country  I  believe  I  would  rather  sign  this  than  any  of  the  others. 
The  question  in  my  mind  is  between  the  third  and  fourth.  My  objection  to 
the  fourth  is,  that  the  mode  of  statement  is  too  extreme.  ...  I  believe 
licenses  should  be  given  (but  somewhat  freely)  to  competent  and  responsible 
persons,  and  then  no  restrictions  on  mode  of  experimentation.  I  believe 
also  it  should  be  used  for  investigation,  not  for  class-room  demonstration. 

V  My  objection  to  the  third  statement  is  the  use  of  the  word  '  utility.'  1 
firmly  believe  that  vivisection  should  he  used  —  and  ivill  always  be  mostly  used  — 
for  purely  scientific  purposes,  icithout  any  reference  to  immediate  and  visible 
utility.  Science  will  not  advance  unless  truth  is  sought  mainly  for  its  own 
sake."  , 

(The  italics  are  not  in  the  original,  but  are  here  used  to  point  out  a  sen- 
tence which,  slightly  changed,  is  incorporated  in  the  next  statement.) 

Prof.  A.  E.  DoLBEAR,  Professor  of  Physics,  Tufts  College,  Mass. 

Prof.  Alphonse  N.  van  Daell,  Mass.  Inst,  of  Technology,  Boston. 

(Professor  van    Daell  erases  all  of  the  second  sentence,  and  the  word 

"  simply"  in  the  first  sentence.     Vivisection  should  be  without  restrictions, 

.   "at  least  by  persons  unfamiliar  with  scientific    methods,  and  incapable   of 

appreciating  the  value  of  experiment.     The  necessity  or  use  of  experiments 

cannot  be  under  anybody's  but  the  professor's  control.") 

Prof.  Theodore  S.  Woolsey,  Yale  Law  School,  New  Haven,  Ct, : 
"  I  would  advocate  vivisection  unrestricted  except  as  to  the  class  of  ex- 
perimenters engaging  in  it.     These  should  be  of  education  and  attainments, 
such  as  to  warrant  work  of  real  scientific  value.     Perhaps  a  State  Commission 
of  competent  scientifitJ  men  could  issue  licenses." 

Dr.  Bashford    Dean,  Instructor  in   Biology,   Columbia  College, 
New  York. 

Prof.  H.  S.  MuNROE,  E.  M.,  Ph.D.,  Columbia  College,  New  York. 
Prof.  J.  U.  Nef,  Ph.D.  (Munich),  University  of  Chicago,  Chicago,  111. 
Prof.  I.  P.  Egberts,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Prof.  W.  F.  McNuTT,  M.  D.,  M.  Pv.  C.  S.,  Edinboro',  University  of 
California,  San  Francisco. 

Prof.  John  Henry  Gray,  Ph.D.  (Halle),  Northwestern  Univer- 
sity, Evanston,  111. 

(Professor  Gray  does  not  wholly  agree  with  this  statement,  but  fails  to 
point  out  the  special  clauses  to  which  objection  is  made.      He  adds  :  "  I  be- 
lieve there  should  be  restrictions,  but  not  such  as  described.  ) 
Prof.  Arthur    Fairbanks,   Ph.D.,    Yale   Divinity   School,   New 
Haven,  Conn. :  — 

(Erases    second   sentence  )      "  In   colleges   and   universities    vivisection 
should  be  without  restrictions  other  than  those  imposed  by  the  instructors." 


VIVISECTION   WITHOUT   KESTKICTIONS.  59 

Prof.  A.  D.  HuKT,  LL.D.,  Tulane  University,  New  Orleans,  La. 
.  Prof.  Jere.  W.  Jencks,  Ph.D.,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. : 

"  Wliile  the  statement  does  not  accurately  express  lAy  views,  it  does  so 
more  nearly  than  any  of  the  others.'' 

Prof.  C.  E.  Babxes,  Ph.D.,  University  of  Wisconsin,  Madison. 

(Professor  Barnes  erases  the  word  "  criticism  "  in  the  third  sentence ; 
inserts  "reputable"  before  "experimenter;"  erases  the  clause  following, 
referring  to  degree  of  pain,  and  from  beginning  of  fifth  sentence  to  end  of 
first  paragraph.) 

Prof.  S.  P.  WiNANS,  Ph.D.,  Princeton  University,  N.  J. :  — 
"  Vivisection  should  be  without  arbitrary,  legal  restrictions." 

Prof.  Geo.  L.  Bukk,  Professor  of  History,  Con^ell  University, 
Ithaca,  N.  Y.  :  — 

"I  can  by  no  means  assent  to  either  of  the  four  statements;  but  as  my 
conclusion  would  be  this  one,  I  venture  to  sign  it." 

Prof.  George  C.  Comstock,  Director  of  Washburn  Observatory, 
University  of  Wisconsin,  Madison  :  — 

"  Vivisection  should  be  without  legal  restrictions,  until  the  evils  of  the 
practice  shall  become  more  pronounced  than  they  are  at  the  present  time." 

Prof.  F.  Angell,  Professor  of  Psychology,  Stanford  University, 
California. ' 

Prof.  C.  G.  Gilbert,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Zoology,  Stanford  Uni- 
versity,  California. 

Prof.  J.  M.  Stillman,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Chemistry,  Stanford 
University,  Calfornia. 

John  Fiske,  M.  A.,  LL.D.,  Author,  Cambridge,  Mass  :  — 

"  I  would  prohibit  vivisection  in  class-rooms.  I  agree  with  the  third 
paragraph  of  your  statement,  '  Vivisection  restricted  by  utility.' " 

Dr.  Paul  Carus,  Editor  of  the  "  Open  Court,"  Chicago,  111. 
Prof.  Hexry  Gradle,  M.  D.,  Northwestern  University;  formerly 
in  the  chair  of  Physiology. 

(Does  not  entirely  endorse  phraseology.) 

Seneca  D.  Powell,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Surgery,  N.  Y.  Post-Grad- 
uate Medical  School,  New  York  City. 

Prof.  E.  Wtllys  Andrews,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Surgery,  Chicago, 
Illinois  :  — 

"  Appreciating  the  high  motives  of  those  who  would. interfere,  I  neverthe- 
less think  each  preceptor  has  a  right  to  be  his  own  guide  in  such  matters, 
and  should  be  entirely  unmolested." 


60  VIVISECTION   WITHOUT   KESTKICTIONS.    " 

Prof.  Daniel  R.  Bkower,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Materia  Medicaand 
Therapeutics,  Eush  Medical  College. 

Prof.  Fleming  Cabrow,  M.  D.,  University  of  Michigan.  . 

(Prof.  Carrow  erases  the  words  included  in  parentheses,  and  the  eighth 
line  in  the  statement.) 

•   Prof.  Herman  Knapp,  M.  D.,  New  York  College  of  Physicians 
and  Surgeons,  New  York  City. 

Prof.  Barton  Cooke  Hurst,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Obstetrics,  Uni- 
versity of  Pennsylvania. 

George  F.  Morris,  M.  D.,  late  Professor  of  Physiology,  New  York 
City. 

Prof.  James  B.  Herrick,  M.  D.,  Chicago,  111. :  — 

"  Without  restrictions  save  those  imposed  by  the  teacher  or  professor." 

Conrad  Wesselhoeft,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Pathology  and  Thera- 
peutics, Boston  University  School  of  Medicine,  Boston,  Mass. :  — 

"  Without  restrictions,  except  those  of  the  moral  sentiment  of  sympathy." 

A.  R.  Wright,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  Limit  operations  to  responsible  Professors  in  Laboratory,  or  oblige 
every  one  to  obtain  a  permit  from  a  central  authority." 

E.  Benjamin  Ramsdell,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Samuel  B.    Ward,    M.  D.,   Professor  of   Theory  and  Practice  of 
Medicine,  Albany  Medical  College,  etc.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Malcolm  Leal,  M.  D.,  New  York  City ;  — 

"  For  purpose  of  investigation  but  not  for  class  demonstration,  except  in 
special  cases  where  pain  is  slight  and  not  prolonged." 

Charles  Jewett,  A.  M-,  M.  D.,  Consulting  Physician  to  Kings  Co. 
Hospital,  Professor  of  Obstetrics,  Long  Island  College  Hospital,  etc., 
Brooklyn,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  Vivisection,  or  experimentation  upon  living  creatures,  may  be  used  to 
any  extent  necessary  to  the  advancement  of  science  for  original  research." 
(Professor  Jewett  erases  all  the  remainder  of  the  statement,  and  adds  :) 
"  The  propositinmt  are  all  so  formulated  that  none  hut  a  fanatic  could  subscribe 
to  any  one  of  them.^' 

SiGiSMDND  Waterman,  M,  D.  (Yale),  New  York  City  :  — 
"Your  mode  of  procedure  deserves  hearty  success." 

With  sixty-four  other  medical  men,  two  educators,  and  three 
statesmen. 


VIVISECTION   WITHOUT    RESTKICTIONS.  61 


IV  (b).  vivisection  without  restrictions. 

[As  the  uucompromisiug  pliraseology  of  the  first  statement  seemed  objectionable 
to  many,  a  new  statenieut  was  formuhited  toward  tlie  close  of  the  inquiry,  and  sent, 
with  preceding  forms,  princii^ally  to  members  of  the  medical  profession.] 

ViviSECTioic,  or  experimentation  upon  living  animals,  must  be 
looked  at  simply  as  a  method  of  studying  the  phenomena  of  Life; 
and  as  such  it  should  be  subject  neither  to  criticism,  supervision, 
nor  restraints  of  any  kind. 

It  may  be  used  by  any  scientific  experimenter  to  any  extent  he 
may  desire,  for  demonstration  before  students  of  the  statements  con- 
tained in  their  text-books,  as  an  aid  to  memory,  or  for  any  conceiv- 
able purpose  of  investigation  into  vital  phenomena.  And,  while 
many  discoveries  of  value  in  the  treatment  of  human  ailments  have 
undoubtedly  been  due  to  experiments  on  animals,  yet  even  these 
we  regard  as  of  secondary  importance  to  the  absolute  freedom  of 
research,  and  the  independence  of  Science  from  all  restrictions  and 
restraints.  P-ure  Science,  which  exists  for  its  own  sake,  stands  on 
a  far  higher  plane  than  Science  which  exists  merely  for  utility  to 
mankind.  We  firmly  believe  that  Vivisection  should  be  used,  and 
will  always  be  mostly  used,  to  add  to  pure  scientific  knowledge  as  sudi , 
wltJiQut  reference  to  any  usefulness  foreseen.  Truth  should  be  sought 
for  its  own  sake.  Dr.  Hermann,  Professor  of  Physiology  at  Zurich, 
has  well  said  that  "no  true  investigator  in  his  researches  thinks  of 
their  practical  utilization;  that  the  advancement  of  Knowledge,  and 
not  practical  utility  to  ^Medicine,  is  the  true  and  straightforward 
object  of  all  Vivisection." 

We  would  not  avoid  the  question  of  Pain.  It  is  often  the  neces- 
sity of  Vivisection.  But  ISTature  will  not  yield  all  her  secrets  with- 
out a  wrench.  For  instance,  if  only  by  causing  acute  suffering  a 
teacher  can  illustrate  the  functions  of  the  nervous  system,  should 
he,  merely  for  that  reason,  stay  his  hand  ?  Ought  we  to  insist  that 
an  enthusiastic  experimenter  should  forego  any  phase  of  research 
whatever,  simply  because  of  the  torture  that  research  may  perhaps 
require  ?  Such  questions-  afford  but  one  reply.  Science  does  not 
place  reverence  for  Pity  higher  than  its  reverence  for  any  new'  fact 
whatever. 

In  our  judgment  this  question  of  Pain  should  be  left  absolutely  to 
the  decision  of  the  experimenter  himself.  He  alone  can  determine 
what  degree  of  pain  he  needs  to  inflict  for  the  success  of  his 
experiment.     No  laws  should  constrain  him,  no  critics  judge  him. 


62  VIVISECTION    WITHOUT   RESTRICTIONS. 

RoswELL  Park,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Surgery,  University  of  Buf- 
falo, N.  Y. 

Francis  H.   Stuart,  M.  D.,  Obstetrician  to  Brooklyn  Hospital, 
Lecturer  on  Surgery,  Long  Island  College  Hospital,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  I  am  in  favor  of  vivisection  without  other  restriction  or  restraint  than 

the  conscience  of  the  experimenter  himself." 

Nicholas  Senn,  M.  D.,  Surgeon,  Chicago,  111. 
Henry  M.  Lyman,  M.D.,  Chicago,  111. 

J.  H.  Raymond,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  Long  Island  Col- 
lege Hospital,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

J.  PoHLMAN,  Professor  of  Physiology,  University  of  Buffalo,  K.  Y. : 
"  No  incompetent  or  sentimental  critics  should  judge  him." 

Frederick  J.  Nott,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  New  York  City  :  — 

"  Whatever  restrictions  are  desirable  may  be  best  formulated  by  the 
schools  and  institutions  in  and  for  which  vivisection  is  principally  done." 

William  J.  Cronyn,  M.  D.,  Milwaukee,  "Wis. :  — 

"...  Dr.  Bigelow's  declaration  that  '  vivisection  deadens  the  hum.anity 
of  the  students'  may  possibly  be  true  in  a  very  limited  number  of  cases,  but 
only  in  students  whose  humanity  was  a  minimum  to  begin  with.  There  are 
Jesse  Pomeroys  that  are  not  in  prison  ;  a  very  few  may  be  in  the  medical 
profession*  yet  even  in  these  cases  it  is  better  that  their  minimum  of  human- 
ity be  deadened,  than  that  the  world  should  through  unnecessary  ignorance 
be  deprived  of  many  who  have  a  great  deal  of  it." 

Mary  Putnam  Jacobi,  M.  D.,  New  York  City. 
Abby  Leach,  Professor  of  Greek,Vassar  College,  Poughkeepsie,N.Y. 
I.  Adler,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Clinical  Pathology,  N.  Y.  Polyclinic, 
New  York  City. 

S.  Oscar  Myers,  M.  D.  ,  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  Although  there  mav  be  an  occasional  inhuman  brute,  I  think  the  subject 
may  be  safely  left  without  legal  restrictions." 

Herbert  M.  Hill,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Chemistry,  University  of 
Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Israel  C.  Eussell,  Professor  of  Geology,  University  of  Michigan, 
Ann  Arbor. 

Daniel  Laferte,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Anatomy,  Detroit  College 
of  Medicine,  Mich. 

Henry  Sewall,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  Denver  Medical 
College,  Col. 

Edward  C.  Pickering,  Astronomer,  Cambridge  Observatory  :  — 
"  Approved  (but  not  if  painful)  to  illustrate  known  facts." 

With  one  hundred  and  fifty-three  physicians,  and  three  educators. 


EXTRACTS   FROM   LETTERS. 

Dr.  T.  Lauder  Bruxton,  M.  D.,  LL.D.,  F.  R.  S.,  England  :  — 

"  I  feel  very  strongly  that,  while  restriction  by  law  is  unadvisable  and 
likely  to  prove  harmful,  every  operator  must  be,  and  ought  to  be,  influenced 
by  public  opinion  and  by  his  own  conscience.  I  hold  that  vivisection  opera- 
tions belong  to  the  same  category  as  the  use  of  the  whip  by  coachmen  ;  and 
that  while  any  instances  of  abuse,  either  of  experiments  or  of  the  whip  by  the 
coachman  or  car-driver,  ought  to  be  taken  cognizance  of,  and  if  necessary 
punished,  it  is  as  objectionable  to  limit  an  experimenter  in  what  he  is  going 
to  do  as  it  would  be  to  pass  a  law  that  no  driver  of  a  horse  or  other  animal 
was  to  carry  a  whip  or  other  instrument  which  could  be  used  for  the  infliction 
of  pain  upon  the  animal  he  is  driving." 

(The  advocates  of  restriction  of  vivisection  would  probably  agree  with 
Dr.  Brunton  that  vivisection  operations  belong  to  the  same  category  as  the 
use  of  the  whip  by  coachmen.  They  would  add,  however,  that  just  as  the 
law  recognizes  what  is  cruelty  on  the  part  of  the  driver,  and  what  may  be 
permissible  to  him,  it  should  do  the  same  in  the  case  of  the  physiologist.) 

Sir  JoH>r  Eric  Erichsex,  F.  R.  S.,  F.  R.  C.  S.,  etc.,  Surgeon  :  — 

"  Experiments  on  living  animals  are  absolutely  necessary  for  the  advance- 
ment of  medical  surgery  and  biological  science.  Such  experiments  should 
not  be  allowed  without  proper  restrictions  as  a  safeguard  against  their  abuse 
by  incompetent  persons,  or  their  being  performed  for  futile  purposes.  Such 
experiments  .should  only  be  performed  for  purposes  of  utility,  —  that  is,  the 
advancement  of  scientific  knowledge,  —  and  not  for  the  purpose  of  acquirins 
manual  dexterity;  nor  should  they  be  allowed  as  class  demonstrations  or  for 
needless  repetition.  All  experiments  on  living  animals,  if  painful,  should  be 
performed  under  an  anresthetic. 

"  Experiments  on  living  animals  are  most  carefully  restricted  in  this 
country.  ...  I  acted  as  government  inspector  of-  living  animals  for  several 
years,  and  I  can  safely  assert  that  the  provisions  of  the  act  were  vigorously 
enforced,  and  never,  to  my  knowledge,  contravened."' 

Prof.  J.  Sully,  London,  England  :  — 

"  I  believe  both  in  the  desirability  of  a  certain  control  of  vivisection  ex- 
periments by  the  feeling  of  a  community,  or  rather  in  a  free  expression  of 
this  feeling,  and  of  urging  it  on  legislators  and  others.  At  the  same  time,  I 
think  if  an  ignorant  public  were  to  determine  when  and  where  such  experi- 
ments are  to  be  carried  out,  some  of  the  most  valuable  and  useful  parts  of 
scientific  work  would  be  arrested.  It  is  eminently  a  case  for  adjustment 
between  a  worthy  popular  sentiment  and  the  claims  of  science.  How  these 
are  both  to  be  satisfied  I  am  not  clear,  though  firmly  believing  in  the 
desirability." 


64  EXTRACTS   FROM    LETTERS. 

From  President  Franklix  Cakter,  LL.D., Williams  College,  Mass. : 

"The  second   statement  conies    nearest  to  my  ojjinion ;  but  I  have  no 

behef  in  the  desirableness  of  the  State  undertaking  the  delicate  business  of 

controlling  or  directing  operations  in  laboratories.     I  do  not  sign  the  second 

statement,  but  send  you  this  general  reply." 

From  Prof.  George  A.  Coe,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Philosophy,  North- 
western University  :  — 

(Professor  Coe  objects  to  signing  any  of  the  statements,  and  adds  :)  "  The 
outcome  of  this  consideration  is  not  to  let  things  take  their  course  without 
reference  to  humanitarian  considerations,  or  rather  that  humanitarian  ethics 
should  be  persistently  emphasized  before  all  persons  concerned, — students, 
instructors,  faculties." 

From  James  K.  Chadwick,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. :  — 

^'  Vivisection  is  sometimes  abused  by  the  infliction  of  suffering  upon  the 
brute  creation  without  corresponding  benefit  to  humanity.  These  abuses  I 
would  like  to  see  stopped.  None  of  your  plans  seem  to  me  to  attain  that 
object  without  putting  objectionable  restrictions  upon  this  practice." 

(Dr.  Chadwick  denies  that  it  is  a  "  common  practice  "  in  the  United 
States  to  subject  animals  to  Corture  merely  for  the  purpose  of  demonstrating 
well  known  or  accepted  facts.  The  Committee  beg  to  refer  him  to  the 
earlier  editions  of  Flint'^  Physiology,  and  to  experiments  u])on  the  nervous 
system  there  detailed,  as  having  been  made  "  for  class  demonstrations.") 

From  Vincent  Y.  Bowditch,  M.  D.,    Harvard    Medical    School, 
Boston,  Mass. :  — 

"  After  weighing  the  matter  carefully,  I  can,  I  think,  conscientiously  sign 
the  second  statement,  '  Vivisection  restricted  by  Utility.'  I  believe  firmly 
that  in  the  right  hands  vivisection  has  been  and  will  be  of  great  use  to  hu- 
manity. At  the  same  time,  I  think  that  much  (1  cannot  say  from  experience 
how  much)  has  been  done  that  is  not  really  necessary,  and  this  I  would  have 
stopped." 

From  Kev.  F.  J.  Clare,  Phillipsburg,  Pa. :  — 

"  It  is  questionable  whether  any  prohibitory  humane  enactments  can  be 
fully  enforced  or  will  be  fully  obeyed.  Nevertheless,  right  legislation  is 
helpful  and  salutary,  and  should  be  encouraged." 

T.  M.  Balliet,  j\[.  D.,  Philadelphia,  ^enn. :  — 

"  I  have  subscribed  to  vivisection  restricted  by  utility,  because  I  cannot 
see  the  advantage  in  vivisection  as  class  demonstration ;  but  fishing  and  gun- 
ning are  recreations  infinitely  more  cruel,  and  the  pain  inflicted  on  lower 
animals  many  hundred  times  larger,  than  the  most  unbounded  vivisection  by 
scientists." 

From  Prof.  Earl  Barnes,  Stanford  University,  Cal. :  — 

"  It  is  almost  impossible  to  formulate  a  definition  to  which  a  thoughtful 
man  can  subscribe  to-day.   If  I  were  to  make  my  own  statement,  I  should  say 


EXTKAGTS  FROM  LETTERS.  65 

that  vivisection  should  be  allowed  where  there  is  hope  of  discovery  of  some 
truth,  or  demonstration  of  some  hypothesis  of  value  to  humanit}-,  provided  it 
is  conducted  by  men  who  are  wise  and  well  trained." 

From  Ephraim  Cutter,  M.  D.,  LL.D.,  New  York  :  — 

"  I  am  in  favor  of  experiments  made  on  criminals  sentenced  to  death 
justly,  for  the  good  of  society  ;  that  is,  in  penal  physiology.  There  is  a  cry- 
ing need  of  the  following  experiments  :  (1)  Feeding,  to  prove  that  tubercu- 
losis is  mainly  caused  by  feeding,  —  and  cured  as  caused,  by  feeding.  (2) 
That  fatty  degeneration  is  caused  and  cured  by  feeding.  (3)  That  throm- 
bosis is  caused  and  cured  by  feeding.  (4)  That  cancer  is  caused  and  cured 
by  feeding.  (5)  That  all  gravelly  diseases  come  from,  and  can  be  made  cur- 
able by,  feeding.  (6)  That  the  noxious  properties  of  common  foods  be  tested 
on  human  criminals.  (7)  That  consumption  of  the  bowels  be  thus  proved  to 
come  from  food.  (8)  Finally,  that  worthless  and  criminal  lives  thus  be  made 
valuable  for  the  good  of  society. 

•'  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  re-proving  by  vivisection  facts  already  established. 
Many  lives  are  now  saved  in  gun-shot  wounds  of  the  abdomen  because  of  vivi- 
sections on  dogs,  which  otherwise  would  have  been  lost ;  but  crime  should 
furnish  the  materials  in  most  vivisections  in  the  larger  sense  of  the  term." 

From  Nathan  E.  Brill,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Visiting  Physician  of  Mt. 
Sinai  Hospital,  ISTew  York  :  — 

"  I  can  only  subscribe  to  statement  III.  in  part,'  and  to  statement  IV.  (b)  in 
part.  I  do  not  believe  in  the  restriction  to  utility,  nor  in  allowing  unrestricted 
vivisection.  We  do  not  produce  disease  in  man  for  the  purpose  of  producing 
symptoms  and  pathological  processes  of  that  disease.  Who  would  venture, 
for  example,  to  inoculate  a  human  being  with  small-pox  for  the  purpose  of 
showing  its  symptoms  ?  Students  are  ready  enough  to  take  the  word  of  the 
teacher  and  their  books  as  to  the  facts  of  that  disease.  Nothing  of  importance 
is  gained  by  subjecting  animals  to  torture  to  demonstrate  established  facts. 
Such  experiments  are  vranton.  The  truths  of  physiological  laws  should  be 
taught,  therefore,  in  the  same  way  as  are  the  facts  of  disease. 

"  Excepting  these  limitations,  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  further  restriction 
of  vivisection  would  be  a  hindrance  to  scientific  progress.  .  .  .  Vivisection 
should  be  taken  away  from  those  who  use  it  simply  to  show  generally  accepted 
facts  in  connection  with  vital  phenomena,  because  such  experiments  are  useless. 
It  seems  to  me  to  be  an  unjustifiably  use  of  vivisection  to  apply  it,  as  some  phy- 
siologists do,  simply  to  demonstrate  facts  which  are  universally  accepted." 

Sir  Dyce  Duckworth,  M.  D.,  LL.D.,  Honorary  Physician  to 
H.  R.  H.  the  Prince  of  Wales  :  — 

"A  measure  of  State  regulation  is  in  my  opinion  desirable;  but  senti- 
mentalists who  have  no  means  of  forming  sound  opinions  on  the  problems 
involved  should  not  influence  or  bias  the  legislators.  Vivisection  should  be 
forbidden  to  any  but  skilled  teachers." 

George  Fleming,  C.  B.,  LL.D.,  Ex-President  of  the  Eoyal  College 
of  Veterinary  Surgeons,  North  Devon,  England  :  — 

"  T  approve  of  this  statement,  '  vivisection  restricted  by  utility.' " 

5 


66  EXTRACTS   FROM   LETTERS. 

From  Samuel  W.  Abbott,  M.  D.,  M.  A.,  Secretary  State  Board 
of  Health,  Boston,  Mass.  :  — 

"  The  definition  of  vivisection  is  a  pretty  difficult  matter  ...  I  am  in 
favor  of  its  continuance,  with  such  restrictions  as  shall  make  it  imjoossible  to 
conduct  such  operations  in  a  cruel  or  painful  manner." 

From  Paul  Carus,  Editor  of  "The  Mouist"  and  ^'The  Open 
Court":  — 

"  None  of  the  four  statements  represents  the  opinion  which  I  hold.  I 
would  formulate  my  position  as  favoring  vivisection,  with  moral  and  without 
legal  restrictions.  While  I  am  convinced  that  vivisection  cannot  be  abolished, 
I  insist  upon  its  being  restricted  by  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  vivisector  and 
his  audience. 

"  The  fundamental  law  of  morality  is  not  the  avoidance  of  pain,  but  the 
intellectual  and  emotional  growth  and  ex2;)ansion  of  our  souls.  .  .  .  Wher- 
ever you  can  detect  professors  and  students  who  with  blunted  moral  senses 
necessarily  and  cruelly  inflict  pain,  you  should  at  least  call  attention  to  the 
barbaric  methods  which  they  employ,  even  thougli  they  be  scientists  of  high 
repute.  To  pass  new  laws  will  do  no  good ;  but  to  ventilate  the  question 
by  public  discussion,  and  help  those  vivisectionists  who  do  not  possess  moral 
restraint  to  acquire  it,  will  do  an  immense  deal  of  good." 

From  Mary  Putnam  Jacobi,  M.  D.,  Visiting  Physician  at  the 
New  York  Infirmary,  Graduate  from  L'.ficole  de  Medicine,  Paris, 
France,  1871 :  — 

"The  fourth  statement  entirely  represents  my  views  on  this  important 
question,  yet  leaves  something  to  be  added.  It  is  in  my  opinion  ridiculous 
foV  outsiders,  necessarily  imperfectly  acquainted  with  methods  of  physio- 
logical research,  to  be  allowed  to  prescribe  what  may  or  may  not  be  done 
to  demonstrate  a  proposition  or  to  impart  to  students  a  living  conception  of 
the  phenomena  of  life.  But  I  think  it  quite  fair  that  the  experimenter 
should — like  the  butcher,  and  more  than  is  at  present  the  case  with  the 
hunter  —  be  to  a  certain  extent  supervised  and  expected  to  reduce  to  a 
minimum  the  suffering  inflicted,  and  to  inflict  none  but  what  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  attain  his  chosen  end." 

From  Mary  A.  Mixer,  M.  D.,  formerly  Professor  of  Physiology  in 
Northwestern  University,  Woman's  Medical  College :  — 

**  We  consider  any  attempt  to  limit  vivisection  by  the  amount  of  pain 
produced  to  be  entirely  impracticable,  since  we  have  no  means  of  knowing 
how  much  pain  an  animal  suffers  compared  to  a  human  being." 

From  Prof,  Abby  Leach,  Vassar  College,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  Certainly,  students  in  the  laboratory  ought  to  be  held  in  check  by  their 
instructors,  and  it  is  unwarrantably  cruel  not  to  avoid  pmn  where  it  is  pos- 
sible.    If,  however,  the  search  for  truth  demands  pain,  then  have  the  pain." 

From  Eev.  W.  F.  Mutch,  Ph.D.,  New  Haven,  Conn. :  — 

"  With  reference  to  the  vivisection  question,  I  am  not  disposed  to  sign 
any  of  the  statements  proposed.     Doubtless,  there  are  abuses  in  colleges  as 


EXTEACTS  FKOM  LETTERS.  67 

there  are  in  barns;  but  it  is  clearly  impossible  to  reach  them  with  law,  and 
it  is  one  of  the  things  which  must  be  entrusted  to  humanity  as  it  is." 

Prof.  Burt  G.  Wilder,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Physiology,  etc.,  Cor- 
nell University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y.  :  — 

"  I  cannot  sign  either  of  the  declarations  of  your  circular.  My  views  and 
practice  are  indicated  in  the  enclosed  lecture-sheet." 

■  (Extract.)  "  From  the  use  of  a  single  word,  '  vivisection,'  for  two  widely 
different  things,  —  painful  and  painless  experimentation,  —  have  resulted 
much  confusion,  injustice,  and  distress  of  mind.  .  .  .  Two  kinds  of  vivisec- 
tion should  be  verbally  distinguished  as  sentisection  and  callisection.  .  .  . 
Without  prejudice  to  the  claim  of  some  that  sentisection  is  demanded  for  the 
advancement  of  knowledge  by  experts,  the  writer  holds  that  it  is  not  warranted 
for  the  dissemination  of  knowledge." 

MoNCURE  D.  Conway,  M. A.,  L.H. D.,  Author,  England:  — 

"  (1)  I  do  not  think  that  the  question  turns  exclusively  on  pain  ;  even  with- 
out pain,  destruction  of  some  animals  should  not  be  allowed  without  very  great 
advantage,  —  for  example,  monkeys.  (2)  I  do  not  think  vivisection  should  be 
allowed  for  demonstration  of  facts  already  discovered.  (3)  It  is  doubtful 
whether,  in  philosophical  research,  the  zobphili'sts  would  be  competent  judges 
of  the  offices  for  which  vivisection  is  justifiable." 

From  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  C.  Hall,  Chicago,  111. :  — 

"  I  believe  the  best  thing  the  State  could  do  would  be  to  restrict  the  right 
of  vivisection  to  responsible  persons,  and  to  control  carefully  the  institutions 
under  whose  directions  such  persons  worked." 

From  President  Gr.  Stanley  Hall,  Clark  University :  — 

"  I  hesitate  somewhat  between  statements  II.  and  III.  I  have  no  hesita- 
tion in  dissenting  from  I.  and  IV.  I  do  not  quite  wish  to  put  myself  on 
record  as  agreeing  with  either  of  the  positions.  It  is  very  rarely  justifiable 
to  operate  for  mere  demonstration,  but  I  am  not  ready  to  see  that  absolutely 
forbidden  on  all  animals.  I  believe  most  experiments  can  be  made  painless, 
but  a  few  of  the  cardinal  tests  cannot ;  so  that  I  should  not  have  this  abso- 
lutely forbidden." 

From  H.  H.  A.  Beach,  M.  D.,  Surgeon,    Massachusetts  General 
Hospital :  — 

"  I  am  unwilling  to  sign  either  of  the  four  statements.  Vivisection  without 
restriction  I  regard  as  an  abomination,  and  the  laws  which  permit  such  a 
practice  a  blot  upon  the  country  that  makes  them.  Vivisection  restricted  by 
utility  I  should  sign,  but  there  is  no  rule  for  excluding  the  clause,  '  Science 
must  prove  that  advantage  and  that  necessity.'  " 

From  Hon.  J.  S.  Willis,  M.  C.  :  — 

"It  would  be  unwise  and  narrow  to  prohibit  vivisection  absolutely.  It  is 
allowable  to  mankind  under  restrictions  to  investigate  all  subjects  that  con- 
cern the  welfare  of  the  huninn  familv.  .  .   .  Utilitv  should  be  a  condition  and 


68  EXTEACTS  FROM  LETTEES. 

prerogative  of  vivisection.  The  simple  play  of  liuman  fancy  or  curiosity 
should  be  discarded  in  testing  and  teaching  so  intricate  a  subject. 

"  There  are  other  fields  sufficiently  wide  and  varied  iu  which  science  may 
amuse  itself,  without  attacking  the  citadel  of  animal  life. 

"  It  is  doubtful  if  vivisection  should  be  allowed  at  all,  unless  it  can  be  per- 
formed without  pain.  Science  is  not  warranted  to  inflict  pain  upon  the  basis 
of  mere  experiment.  Where  the  use  of  antesthetics  can  preclude  the  occur- 
rence of  pain,  experiment  for  purposes  of  utility  is.allowable.  Pain  can  never 
be  banished  from  this  world,  and  mankind  must  suffer  its  full  share  ;  and  it  is 
unphilosophical  to  add  to  the  horrors  of  commiseration  by  uselessly  involving 
the  inferior  animals  in  the  toils  of  exaggerated  science." 

From  Pres.  N.  H.  Chamberlin,  A.  M.,  LL.B.,  McKendrie  College, 
Illinois  :  • — 

"  I  should  be  inclined  to  strike  out  in  the  second  paragraph  these  words, 
'  but  whether  any  useful  knowledge  can  be  acquired  or  not  is  beside  the 
question.'  I  should  rest  the  whole  proposition  on  the  moral  quality  of  the 
act,  without  any  statement  of  inducement  implied  in  the  clause  struck  out." 

Sir  Walter  Besant,  Author,  England :  — 

"  I  am  not  a  scientific  man,  nor  can  I  test  the  statements  and  claims 
advocated  in  favor  of  vivisection ;  but  to  cut  and  hack  living  creatures  with- 
out the  strongest  possible  reasons,  or  to  suffer  any  irresponsible  anatomist 
to  do  so  without  the  strongest  possible  expectations,  without  anaesthetics,  is 
unsjjeakably  shocking  and  horrible.'" 

EicHARD    H.  HuTTOx,  M.  A.,  LL.D.,  Editor  of  the  "■  Spectator," 
Loudon,  England :  — 

"  Vivisection  should  be  allowable  if  without  any  pain  greater  than  is 
inflicted  in  putting  to  death  in  a  humane  fashion.  This  is  the  only  answer 
which  seems  to  me  maintainable  by  any  one  who  thinks  it  right  to  kill  the 
lower  animals  for  man's  benefit;  and  to  this  answer  I  adhere." 

Hon.  Area  K.  Waterman,  Illinois  Appellate  Court,  Chicago,  111.  : 

"  Civilization  in  its  moral  aspect  consists  in  a  heightened  sympathy  with 

and  consideration  for  those  men  or  animals  in  our  power.     It  is  impossible  to 

train  a  child  to  indifference  as  regards  the  suffering  of  a  helpless  dog,  and  at 

the  same  time  mindful  of  the  rights  of  little  children. 

"  It  is  immaterial  whether  he  who  proposes  to  torture  be  an  ignorant 
savage  or  a  distinguished  savant.  The  aim  of  each  is  the  same.  The  carter 
who  pounds  his  horse,  the  boy  who  torments  a  kitten,  and  the  scientist  who 
twists  the  quivering  nerves  of  a  helpless  dog  are  each,  in  his  own  way,  en- 
deavoring to  promote  'human  happiness.'  Whoever  believes  his  work  to  be 
of  supreme  importance  will  naturally  become  cruel.  To  whomsoever  in  the 
cause  of  science  the  agony  of  a  dying  rabbit  is  of  no  consequence,  it  is  likely 
that  the  old  or  worthless  man  will  soon  be  a  thing  which  in  the  cause  of  learn- 
ing may  well  be  sacrificed.  There  is  no  reason  for  thinking  that  Torquemada 
or  Robespierre  were  naturally  any  more  cruel  than  the  educators  who  endeavor 
to  add  brilliancy  and  piquancy  to  their  lectures  by  an  exhibition  of  the  manner 


EXTEACTS  FROM  LETTERS.  69 

in  which  a  dumb  brute  behaves  when  dissected  alive.  Vivisection  should  be 
permitted  only  to  competent  and  trustworthy  persons,  and  restricted  to 
licensed  places  which  shall  be  open  at  all  times  to  inspection  by  the  Presi- 
dents of  Humane  Societies  for  Protection  of  Animals,  or  their  authorized 
representatives. ' ' 

OuiDA,  Autlior,  Florence,  Italy  :  — 

"  Should  ever  such  an  opinion  as  that  implied  in  the  statement  for  vivi- 
section without  restriction  become  that  of.  mankind  in  general,  the  world  will 
be  a  hell  indeed.  The  pretensions  of  what  are  called  scientists  are  a  menace 
to  all  liberty,  peace,  and  virtue,  and  the  doctrines  thereof  followed  out  from 
youth  to  age  would  make  of  the  earth  a  shamble." 

From  H.  R.  Brissett,  M.  D.,  Lowell,  Mass. :  — 

"  Statements  I.  and  II.  I  pass  over  as  in  nu  way  tenable.  Statement  III. 
contains  an  "  if."  Ansesthesia  is  good  while  it  lasts,  but  I  have  often  seen  it 
pass  off,  and  the' experimenter  go  on  with  the  work  in  hand  without  renewing 
it ;  and  all  the  class  saw  with  revulsion  that  there  was  real  torture  in  the  case. 
So  I  think  absolutely,  witii  such  men  as  Tait  and  Bigelow,  that  vivisection 
subserves  no  good  purpose,  and  has  only  theory  (vague  at  that)  to  support  it." 

From  Clayton  L.  Hill,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. :  — 

"  I  know  from  personal  experience  that  medical  and  surgical  research 
does  not  demand  the  fearful  suffering  and  waste  of  life  that  is  entailed  upon 
the  lower  animals.  I  have  seen  many  hundreds  of  vivisections,  and  not  one 
of  them  develojied  a  new  truth  or  an  idea  not  already  well  established. 
Vivisection  as  practised  in  medical  schools  is  simply  a  sort  of  theatrical  per- 
formance for  the  benefit  of  the  students  and  the  glory  of  the  professors." 

From  John  C.  Du  Bois,  A.  M.,  M.  D.,  Late  Surgeon  in  the  U.  S. 
Army : — 

"  During  three  years  of  student  life  in  Paris,  I  saw  a  good  deal  of  torture 
to  animals  in  unnecessary  demonstrations  to  students  of  well-known  facts, 
and  I  heard  stories  of  Magendie's  cruelties.  A  good  deal  of  sentimental 
nonsense  has  been  written  and  spoken  upon  vivisection  ;  yet  there  have  been 
abuses,  and  the  benefits  such  experiments  have  conferred  do  not  palliate 
them.     1  am  anxious  for  a  proper  and  legal  settlement  of  this  subject." 

From  LuiGi  Galvani  Doane,  M.  D.,  New  York  City :  — 

"  Put  me  down  as  the  antagonist  of  vivisection  in  any  form.  The  office 
of  the  physician  is  to  heal  wounds  and  to  save  life,  not  to  take  it." 

From  George  H.  Payne,  M.  D.,  Boston,  Mass. :  — 

"  I  believe  fully  that  we  have  no  right  to  torture  God's  dumb  creatures, 
and  that  it  does  little  or  no  good  to  experiment  upon  animals." 

J.  W.  Thomson,  M.  D.,  New  York  City  :  — 

"  We  do  not  believe  that  vivisection  ever  gave  knowledge  that  led  to  the 
relief  of  a  single  htiman  being  from  jiain,  or  in  any  way  helped  to  ameliorate 
human  suffering.     This  diabolical  practice  is  totally  needless  as  well  as  das- 


70  EXTRACTS  FKOM  LETTERS. 

tardly  inhuman.  No  man  who  has  been  guilty  of  vivisection  ought  to  be 
allowed  to  practise  as  a  physician.  Imagine  any  one  coming  from  a  torture- 
chamber  to  see  a  sick  child,  or  to  have  a  mission  to  help  suffering  humanity ! 
How  can  one  who  is  callous  to  animal  suffering  yearn  to  help  his  fellow-man  ? 
What  can  be  learned  from  the  quivering,  writhing  flesh  for  intelligent  guid- 
ance for  the  sick?  Do  the  tissues,  laid  open  by  the  lance,  display  normal 
function?  Assuredly  not.  What  is  the  story  that  a  humane  mind  would  read? 
The  only  true  one  of  which  we  can  conceive  is  the  palpitating  plea  for  mercy, 
unheeded  by  the  inhuman  wretch  who,  in  the  name  of  a  false  science,  gloats 
like  a  ghoul  over  his  fiendish,  bloody  work." 

From  James  P.  Hawes,  M.  D.,  North  Hector,  N.  Y. :  — 

"...  I  have  seen  dogs  kept  howling  and  starving,  with  large  doses  of 
chloral  injected  in  one  side  and  strychnine  in  the  other  side;  some  lived 
and  some  died.  What  did  it  prove  ?  In  one  of  our  leading  colleges,  I  have 
seen  a  calf  split  open  and  a  little  flag-staff  stuck  in  the  heart  for  the  edifica- 
tion of  the  students  !  What  did  that  prove  of  the  human  heart  ?  Enough 
accidents  happen  to  poor  humanity  to  test  the  results  of  pain  and  wounds, 
burns  and  scalds,  freezing  and  anaesthesia,  without  infliction  on  the  poor 
brute." 

From  A.  Eose,  M.  D.,  New  York:  — 

"  There  can  be  no  nobler  cause  than  the  prevention  of  cruelty  to  animals 
in  vivisection.  During  the  Middle  Ages  tortures  were  inflicted  under  the 
very  eyes  and  strict  supervision  of  awfully  learned  physicians,  and  thus  we 
see  that  learning  does  not  prevent  us  from  doing  cruelty.  We  have  to  be 
reminded  of  this  example." 

'      Chakles  W.  Super,  President  of  Ohio  University:  — 

"  While  I  am  not  quite  ready  to  say  that  vivisection  should  be  entirely 
prohibited,  I  am  very  strongly  inclined  to  this  opinion  ;  but  I  am  entirely  ready 
to  sav  that  scientific  research  ought  not  to  be  free  and  untrammelled.  The 
humanitarian  interests  of  the  world  are  paramount  to  any  and  every  other. 
Scientific  investigators  sometimes  become  veritable  monomaniacs  in  their 
search  for  knowledge,  and  as  indifferent  to  the  highest  interests  of  their  fellow- 
men  as  other  lunatics.  If  under  the  '  untrammelled-research  '  re'gime,  my 
neighbor  seems  to  be  a  better  subject  for  investigation  than  his  dog,  I  ought 
as  a  matter  of  consistency  to  experiment  on  the  man  father  than  the  brute. 
It  is  not  hard  to  see  whither  such  consistency  would  lead.  I  am  glad  to  see 
that  the  vigorous  agitation  of  this  subject  is  leading  to  what  I  consider  whole- 
some legislation." 

Hon.  EowLAi^D  B.  Ma h any,  M.  C.  :  — 

"  Enough  cruelty  is  already  being  practised  upon  dumb  animals  without 
legalizing  what  at  best  may  be  termed  'experimental  torture.'  .   .  .  Even 
under  the  scalpel  of   the  ablest  operator,  it  is  a  grave    question  of   doubt 
.  whether  any  permanent  benefit  to  science  is  acquired  by  the  process  of  vivi- 
section." 


EXTRACTS   FROM    LETTERS.  71 

Right  Rev.  Geokge  F.  Seymour,  LL.l).,  lUshop  of  Springfield  : 

"  I  consider  that  the  animated  woi'ld  beneath  man  is  a  sacred  trust  com- 
mitted to  liim  by  the  Creator,  and  for  the  right  and  just  administration  of 
wliicli  lie  will  be  held  sternly  accountable.  Hence,  I  would  jjlace  very  severe 
restrictions  upon  vivisection,  and  allow  ils  practice  only  in  cases  where  it 
was  employed  for  settling  cpiestions  which  we  have  good  reason  to  believe 
could  not  be  answered  except  by  such  experiments.  I  would  exclude  abso- 
lutely, and  forbid  under  penalty  by  law,  all  exliibitions  to  students  of  vivi- 
section as  illustrating  ascertained  and  recorded  facts  of  science." 

From  President  W.  P.  John'ston,  Geneva  College,  Pa. :  — 

"  My  opposition  to  vivisection  is  not  so  much  because  of  the  pain  to  the 
animal  dissected  (it  dies  in  a  little  while),  but  because  of  injury  to  the  moral 
nature  of  the  animal  dissecting,  that  lives  probably  for  many  years,  and  has 
o^Aer  chances  on  other  animals  than  dogs  and  cats!  " 

From  John  H.  Keyser,  Hartford,  Conn.:  — 

"  I  was  superintendent  of 'the  Stranger's  Hospital  in  Xew  York  at  a  time 
when  vivisection  was  freely  practised  upon  animals  by  young  student  phy- 
sicians. From  that  experience  I  formed  the  opinion  that  it  was  wicked, 
wanton,  and  cruel  to  clothe  these  young  and  inexj^erienced  men  with  des- 
potic power  over  animals,  and  I  forbade  the  practice.  Mercy  towards  the 
helpless  brute  creation  is,  in  my  judgment,  ample  argument  against  vivisecr 
tion,  and  it  ought  to  cease." 

From  JonxBoARDMAx,  M.  D.,  Buffalo,  jST.  Y. :  — 

"I  do  not  believe  that  any  real  good  comes  to  the  ordinary  student  from 
class  vivisection.  On  the  other  hand,  in  my  opinion,  the  humane  part  of  man 
is  injured  and  the  diabolical  part  comes  nearer  to  the  surface." 

From  Thomas  B.  Fowler,  M.  D.,  Cohocton,  N.  Y, :  — 

"I  do  not  think  the  impression  left  on  the. mind  of  the  average  medical 
student  as  a  result  of  witnessing  the  mutilation  of  animals  is  one  that  really 
adds  to  his  available  store  of  knowledge,  or  tends  to  aid  him  in  prescribing 
for  suffering  humanity.  It  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  baneful  effects  of 
such  experiences  on  the  minds  of  men  whose  actions  are  largely  governed  by 
impulse  or  propensity." 


Note.  —  The  Committee  greatly  regret  that  considerations  of  space  prevent  fur- 
ther quotations  from  the  luimerous  letters  received.  It  is  possible  that  many  of  them 
may  be  hereafter  printed  in  another  form. 


I 


